| Abstract [eng] |
Prevention of corruption both in the public and private sectors is primarily linked to measures and sanctions imposed by public law, and in particular by criminal law. Such legal regulation has determined that in Lithuania the research on corruption and legal measures against it have until now been conducted mainly by the criminal or other public law experts, while the investigations were limited to public law sanctions. Meanwhile, the potential application of civil remedies was kept aside. Such denial of civil law cannot be justified on either theoretical or, above all, practical grounds. The application of civil remedies has a number of advantages that can significantly supplement and broaden criminal law sanctions. The main of these advantages are: the more flexible and broader concept of illegal actions, the presumption of fault on the part of the offender, in some cases calculation the terms of limitations is more favorable to the injured party, compensation of damages to the injured person. This study, firstly, investigates how effectively existing Lithuanian civil law norms and institutes can be used to address the consequences of corrupt practices. Secondly, it identifies the main problems encountered seeking to apply the civil remedies. Thirdly, the study offers suggestions and guidelines that enable a broader and more effective application of civil remedies. The subject of the study is defined by two important aspects. First of all, the study investigates the corruption in the private sector, although the findings could be applied mutatis mutandis to the corruption in the public sector. Second, the investigation deals with different civil remedies and is not limited to civil liability (the latter is just one of possible remedies) since effective remedies for victims of corruption may require different remedies. In particular, the study explores invalidation of contracts, restitution, termination of wrongful acts and civil liability, presenting the detailed analysis of the possibilities and problems of applying each of these remedies in cases of corruption. The investigation found that, as far as the nullity of the bribe contracts is concerned, the main legal basis of the invalidity is their contradiction to the public policy and morality. But in the case of the main contract, the most effective ground for contestation is the invalidity of the transaction due to fraud and the malicious agreement between the party's agent and the other party, as well as the civil agent's infringement of his rights. Depending on the specific ground of the invalidity of the transaction, the effects of the corruption agreements would be reciprocal restitution, unilateral restitution or non-applicability of restitution. The termination of wrongful acts, unlike other civil remedies, is not intended to eliminate the consequences of acts of corruption, but to put an end to or prevent the act of corruption from occurring. Meanwhile, due to its compensatory function, claims for damages are of particular importance to victims of corruption and, in particular, to third parties, who cannot be compensated by other remedies. However, uncertainties remain in the calculation of the amount of damages. |
