Database
The immunities of States and international organisations
This database contains the original national contributions bringing together information on The immunities of States and international organisations
Information on the contribution
- Member State
- Russian Federation
- Themes
- Type of document
- Jurisprudence
- Permanent link to the contribution
- http://www.cahdidatabases.coe.int/C/Immunities/Russian Federation/2000/236
- Translations
-
- No translations
- Add a translation
THIS DOCUMENT CAN BE QUOTED AS FOLLOWS:
Database of the CAHDI "The immunities of States and international organisations" - contribution of Russian Federation - Jurisprudence of 02/11/2000
Database of the CAHDI "The immunities of States and international organisations" - contribution of Russian Federation - Jurisprudence of 02/11/2000
M. Kalashnikova
Author(ity)
Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation
Date of the decision, of the judgment
02/11/2000
Points of law
The Constitutional Court stated that the relevant provisions of the Civil Procedural Code were subsidiary to the provisions of the Labour Code in case of disputes arising form labour contracts. It also stated that the Russian court didn't study the question if the application of Russian legislation by an Embassy of a foreign State could be considered as its consent for the jurisdiction of Russian courts.For these reasons the claim of M. Kalashnikova was to be reconsidered by the lower court and Article 435 of Civil Procedural Code was to be applied subject to the afore-mentioned order of the Constitutional Court.
Summary of the case
A Russian citizen M. Kalashnikova was dismissed from the Embassy of the United States on the basis of Article 33 (2) of the Labour Code of the Russian Federation. Considering her dismissal unlawful, she made a claim against the US Embassy which was based on a contract of employment.The Russian court rejected the claim for the reasons of immunity of an Embassy of a foreign State provided for in Article 435 of the Civil Procedural Code. M. Kalashnikova appealed to the Constitutional Court claiming that Article 435 of the Civil Procedural Code was in contradiction with the Constitution of the Russian Federation, which guarantees her right for judicial protection.
