For late payment under the contract, the head of the institution is fined, even if the centralized accounting department keeps records
Administrative liability is provided for violation of the term and procedure for payment for goods, works, and services during procurement. In accordance with Article 7.32.5 of the Code of Administrative Offences of the Russian Federation, the fine for the customer's officials is from 30,000 to 50,000 rubles.
If the accounting services of an institution are provided by a centralized accounting department, it will not be possible to shift responsibility for late payment of the contract concluded by the institution to it. The customer under the contract is an institution, and the conclusion of an accounting service agreement does not exempt the customer's officials from complying with the law when making purchases. Accordingly, and from administrative responsibility under Article 7.32.5 of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses. If the centralized accounting department is not an authorized body within the framework of procurement centralization and the powers of the customer have not been transferred to it (including the payment of contracts), officials of the customer institution are responsible for late payment.
Analyzing judicial practice, it can be noted that the head of the institution is recognized as the guilty official in such proceedings. And this is not surprising - as a rule, it is he who is responsible for ensuring timely and high-quality fulfillment of the contractual obligations of the institution. Late payment under the contract, according to the judges, indicates that the head of the institution has not taken all necessary and sufficient measures to fulfill obligations.
Moreover, the courts do not consider either a small delay period or the fact of debt repayment during the inspection of the supervisory authorities as a basis for releasing the guilty person from administrative responsibility. The courts also do not recognize such an offense as insignificant, considering that it represents a significant violation of protected public legal relations, and consists not in the occurrence of any material consequences of the offense, but in the neglect of the violator to perform his public legal duties.
Documents: Decisions of the Khabarovsk Regional Court of October 6, 2023 in case No. 21-784/2023 and of October 3, 2023 in case No. 21-786/2023. Resolution of the First Cassation Court of General Jurisdiction of September 25, 2023 in case No. 16-5371/2023
Photo taken from https://ru.freepik.com/popular-photos