Citizen N. with his son came to the zoo. We stopped at a red wolf cells. The boy wanted to feed the wolf, and he threw the cell wallowing near a piece of meat. An employee of the zoo, seeing it demanded that the father and son went to the administration building. There administration official, explaining to visitors that they have grossly violated the rules of visiting the zoo, recorded name, first name and patronymic of a citizen N., his place of residence and demanded to leave the zoo.
The next day the wolf became ill and died several days later. Veterinarian Zoo has drawn the conclusion that the death was due to poisoning.
Administration of the zoo called the police demanding to bring citizen N. to administrative responsibility under Art. 75 of the Federal Law "On Environmental Protection, art. 8.35 of the RF Code of Administrative Offences and article. 55 of the Federal Law on "Animal Kingdom" for acts that led to the death of a red wolf.
Concomitant administration zoo sued a citizen N. for damages caused by the death of a zoo Red wolf who belongs to the species of animals listed in the Red Book, in the amount approved in accordance with Art. 78 of the Federal Law "On Environmental Protection" fees - 50 times the minimum monthly wage.
What responsibility will be borne by the citizen N.?
Gosohotinspektsiya filed a lawsuit in bankruptcy court to the management of the power lines (PTL) for damages caused by the loss of steppe eagles, listed in the Red book of high voltage.
The defendant did not recognize the claim, explaining that in treeless areas pylon birds are often used for recreation. Large birds such as steppe eagles, are killed by contact with the high voltage wires. The defendant believes that, due to the absence of the direct fault in causing the damage claim can not be satisfied.
What decision example of the arbitral tribunal?
Fruit and Vegetable Association filed a lawsuit in bankruptcy court to the plant "Electrocable", which asked the court to recover from the defendant 10 million. Rubles. damage caused as a result of farming emissions of harmful substances in excess of the limit.
The defendant did not recognize the claim, noting that, according to Art. 16 of the Federal Law "On Environmental Protection", he has already paid to the environmental fund established by him for the excess emissions payments.
Give a legal assessment of the situation.
List of references