Factual Mistake in Reference to Non-criminal Law in Economic Crimes

In the scientific literature devoted to the issues of qualification of crimes, the rules for qualifying an act of factual error are often not disclosed. This fact leads to contradictory conclusions, which are based on different, often controversial concepts, as a result - unlimited possibilities for discretion in the criminal justice process, and in the end can be an obstacle to the implementation of the principles of legality, justice, equality of citizens before the court - the basic principles of criminal law and criminal proceedings. The study of the problem of factual error occurs by studying the subjective side of the crime. A large number of studies have been carried out on this topic and no fewer works have been published. This issue was considered by such founders of the criminal law science as N.S. Tagantsev, I.Z. Geller, E.Y. Nemirovsky and others. Subsequently - A.I. Rarog, A.N. Popov and other authors. There were also many dissertation research. However, the authors mainly consider the factual error as an institution of the general part of criminal law, without having the purpose of considering it in more detail in specific types of crimes. Depending on the circumstances in which the subject errs, in the science of criminal law the following types of factual error differ: in the object of encroachment, in the nature of the action or inaction, in the severity of the consequences, in the development of causality. The paper provides a detailed review of these types of factual errors. The question of factual error, both in general and in connection with problems of blanket dispositions, is not fully regulated by criminal law. There are no formal rules for the use of blanket dispositions, the rules for their action in time and space. The solution of these problems could contribute to the addition of criminal legislation with relevant regulations.