Russian Supreme Court Review dated March 25, 2026: Key Takeaways on Labour and Migration Disputes

On March 25, 2026, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation published a review of judicial practice. Vladimir Kwon, Senior Legal Counsel, prepared a brief analysis of the Supreme Court’s key conclusions on migration and labour matters.

On the need to establish the nature of an error that resulted in an excessive salary payment to an employee

Clause 8 of the Review: The law permits the recovery only of that part of the amount overpaid to an employee which constitutes unjust enrichment. For this purpose, the excessive payment must have been made as a result of a calculation error. The qualification of the error is usually the subject of disputes.

The key difference between a calculation error and other types of errors is that it is an arithmetic error made when calculating the amounts payable. Examples of calculation errors include entering an incorrect number of periods actually worked by an employee into a computer program, or failing to insert a decimal point when entering data into a computer program.

Other types of errors include a technical error in the form of a double transfer of funds for the same period, as well as errors made by the employer in applying legal provisions when calculating an employee’s salary and other payments.

On determining the amount of compensation for moral harm recoverable from an employer that failed to ensure proper working conditions

Clause 11 of the Review: When deciding on the amount of compensation for moral harm recoverable from an employer, courts must provide reasons for determining the specific amount of compensation. A court may not reduce the amount of compensation without reasoning and calculations, in order to avoid arbitrary inflation or reduction of the compensation amount.

The court must take into account the degree of the employer’s fault in the workplace accident. Higher courts must carefully examine the reasoning part of lower court decisions and provide a reasoned assessment of it.

On the lawfulness of cancelling a work patent due to late submission of medical documents

Clause 36 of the Review: Failure by a foreign citizen to submit the required medical documents to the territorial body of the Ministry of Internal Affairs within the statutory period constitutes grounds for cancelling the previously issued work patent.

It is important to note that the obligation of foreign citizens to undergo a repeated medical examination after one year from the date of the previous examination does not apply to highly qualified specialists.

On the absence of unconditional immunity of a foreign citizen from migration policy requirements, even where the foreign citizen has a family in Russia

Clause 37 of the Review: When challenging a decision of a public authority to deny entry into the Russian Federation, courts must take into account, among other things, the actual rather than formal circumstances of family relations. In particular, courts must establish whether the spouses lived in the same region, maintained family relations and ran a joint household.

To ensure a comprehensive judicial review, it was necessary to verify whether the foreign citizen had relatives in a foreign state and to establish why reunification of the family in that state was impossible or difficult.

On the application of compulsory migration measures to a foreign citizen who committed a crime in the Russian Federation

Clause 38 of the Review: In this case, the Court confirmed the conclusion set out in Clause 37 of the Review that the formal existence of a marriage or family does not grant foreign citizens immunity from deportation, an entry ban or other measures.

Where violations of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation have been established, together with a breach of the purposes of stay, absence of evidence of employment activity and absence of other relatives in Russia, the application of such measures may be recognized as lawful and proportionate.

About Us

Jingsh Russia is a cross-border team supporting projects between Russia, Mainland China and Hong Kong.

Jingsh’s head office has a professional legal team of at least 8,000 people, including more than 400 partners and over 6,000 practicing lawyers.