Transit and restrictions · А09-3715/2019
Bryansk Customs stopped four shipments of pork fat, liver and herring. The goods appeared on a restricted list but were moving in transit to a consignee outside Russia. The court examined the full transport regime, not merely the label ‘sanctioned goods.’In spring 2019, several food consignments travelled through Russia to a consignee in the Donetsk Region. According to the judgment, they included 20,492 kg of frozen pork fat, 20,017 kg of pork liver and 21,400 kg of frozen herring. The goods originated in the Netherlands and Norway, were placed under customs transit in Belarus, and the Matveev Kurgan road checkpoint was stated as the place of delivery.
At the Krasny Kamen control point, Bryansk Customs officers stopped the vehicles because product codes 0206, 0209 and 0303 appeared in the list of products prohibited from import by Government Resolution No. 778. The entrepreneur challenged the decisions recorded in the vehicle-stop acts.
Decision route
Four checks on one routeEach link was supported by its own document; no single file replaced the others.transit declaration
invoices and certificates
CMR and place of delivery
not released for the Russian market
The court examined paragraph 2 of Presidential Decree No. 391 in the version applicable to the disputed period. It excluded from the destruction regime goods placed under customs transit and carried to third countries where the accompanying documents were authentic, matched the cargo and gave grounds to expect delivery outside Russia.
The court compared not only the product name and origin, but also contracts, the transit declaration, CMR, invoices, veterinary certificates, consignee and place of delivery. Together they showed that the cargo was not being released for circulation on the Russian market. The special economic measures aimed at prohibited imports therefore could not be applied without considering the transit exception.
The Commercial Court of the Bryansk Region held the four customs decisions listed in the operative part unlawful and awarded RUB 1,200 in state-fee costs. The court did not accept the RUB 281,800 damages claim as an amendment in that proceeding, so monetary compensation was not decided on the merits.
Historical rule
The transit exception was not automatic: the documents had to be authentic, correspond to the cargo and support delivery outside Russia.
Presidential Decree No. 391 in the version applicable to the disputed period
The judgment also mentions a later act dated 16 April 2019, but the operative part lists only four decisions. The published ruling therefore supports a conclusion only as to those four vehicle-stop acts, not every shipment by the entrepreneur.
The case illustrates a method of review: establish the procedure, consignor and consignee, place of delivery, authenticity of veterinary documents and the practical ability to complete transit; only then assess the restrictions. The 2019 result cannot be applied to a current route without checking current sanctions rules, traceability and seal requirements.
Court rulings
This review concerns the named court ruling. Any other dispute requires a separate check of the document, date, evidence and procedural stage.Original court document linked; this page provides an English explanation, not a certified translation.