According to Article 953 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan (hereinafter – the CC), a person (the acquirer) who, without grounds established by law or a transaction, has acquired or preserved property (has been unjustly enriched) at the expense of another person (the victim), is obliged to return to the latter the unjustly acquired or preserved property.

For obligations arising from unjust enrichment, it is necessary that the enrichment of one person occurs at the expense of another and that such enrichment occurs in the absence of legal grounds for it, or that such grounds subsequently lapse.

It does not matter whether the unjust enrichment resulted from the behavior of the acquirer of the property, the victim himself, or third parties, or as a consequence of an event – that is, the existence of unjust enrichment (preservation) of property without grounds established by law or a transaction.

In other words, the acquisition or preservation of property by one person results from a corresponding decrease in the property of another person in the absence of contractual or other legal grounds between them.

In recent years, there has been an increase in the number of lawsuits for the recovery of unjust enrichment. This trend is largely associated with the spread of fraud using social engineering methods.

Criminals, posing as bank employees, law enforcement officers, or other persons, under various pretexts, persuade citizens to disclose confidential information or carry out money transfer operations. In some cases, funds are transferred to the accounts of third parties, who formally become their recipients.

Typically, on various specialized platforms, young people are offered the chance to earn a lot of money in a short time with minimal effort, without special requirements or experience.

The most common scheme is one where victims are induced to take out online loans through mobile applications of banks and microfinance organizations, followed by transferring the received loan funds to the accounts of other citizens – droppers.

Example from judicial practice. A lawsuit was filed with the court for the recovery of an amount of unjust enrichment. The plaintiff stated that she received a call from unknown persons posing as bank employees, informing her that a loan had been taken out in her name. Following their instructions, she installed a mobile application and performed a series of actions supposedly to cancel the loan. Subsequently, a man who introduced himself as an employee of the national security committee contacted her and convinced her to transfer the loan funds to a bank account to check the bank employees.

As a result, the funds were transferred to the defendant's card account. A criminal case was initiated on this fact on charges of fraud.

The defendant did not admit the claim, explaining that he was a student and, in order to earn money, responded to an internet advertisement and provided his bank accounts for transit money transfers, without properly formalizing employment relations. The funds received from the plaintiff were transferred to third parties on the same day.

The court established that:

• The receipt of funds into the defendant's account was confirmed by a bank statement;
• The parties are not personally acquainted and live in different regions;
• There are no legal grounds for the defendant to receive the funds;
• The defendant did not formalize employment relations in accordance with the requirements of labor legislation.

Under these circumstances, the court concluded that the defendant's actions bore signs of unjust enrichment and granted the claim for the recovery of the disputed amount.

In this case, unjust enrichment exists because the defendant received the funds and disposed of them at his own discretion.

Such disputes highlight the risks for citizens, especially young people, of participating in dubious internet offers involving the provision of bank accounts for transit operations. Such actions may lead to both civil and criminal liability.

Almagul KAPANOVA,
Judge of the Interdistrict Court of the
city of Aksu, Pavlodar Region