The issue of legal qualification of pre-contractual liability

One of the pressing questions within the institute of pre-contractual liability is its legal qualification. The specificity of this institute allows for a variability of norms regulating this type of civil liability. Despite the fact that the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation has seemingly provided a definitive answer to this question by determining that norms of tort law apply to instances of pre-contractual liability arising from the breakdown of negotiations, this approach has encountered criticism from scholars in the field. In the present work, the author endeavors to critique the position of those who reject the tortious qualification of pre-contractual liability within the framework of Russian law. It is demonstrated that the particularities of the institute in question do not preclude the construction of this type of liability based on the norms of tort law, without the necessity of employing the framework of regulatory contractual relations that arise between negotiating parties. Through a comprehensive analysis, this article seeks to clarify the legal nature of pre-contractual liability, arguing for a more nuanced understanding that aligns with the principles of tort law while addressing the complexities of negotiation processes in civil transactions. This exploration contributes to the broader discourse on the reform of legal standards governing pre-contractual relationships, ultimately aiming for a more coherent and effective legal framework.