Problems of proving technical malfunctions during electronic auctions

This research focuses on the current legislative provisions of the Russian Federation governing the organization and execution of electronic auctions. It also examines law enforcement case studies that highlight challenges in proving technical malfunctions during such proceedings. The aim of this scientific research is to pinpoint the challenges in demonstrating technical malfunctions during electronic bidding for the disposal of state and municipal property rights, alongside identifying potential solutions to address these issues. This research employed various methods of scientific inquiry, including general theoretical approaches such as synthesis, analysis, generalization, deduction, etc., as well as general scientific methods such as system-structural analysis and specific scientific methods such as comparative legal and formal legal analysis. Consequently, employing these methodologies, the research delves into the intricacies of electronic trading, examines the responsibilities of electronic platform operators, and scrutinizes the challenges associated with proving a technical failure during electronic bidding. It was found that the key distinguishing feature of electronic trading is the presence of an additional participant - the operator of the electronic platform - and the presence of the electronic platform itself as a venue for electronic bidding. Responsibility for various technical failures on the electronic platform lies with the platform operator. Conclusions drawn from the scientific research indicate that the primary evidence of a technical failure during electronic trading comprises screenshots and video recordings, both of which must adhere to specific criteria. Specifically, these records must distinctly demonstrate the occurrence of a technical failure, directly attributed to the electronic platform hosting the electronic auctions, such as a software glitch or technical error visibly captured on the screen. They should also showcase the functionality of the plaintiff's own software and hardware, including a stable Internet connection. Typically, the applicant/plaintiff must provide evidence that an Internet connection with the electronic platform cannot be established while other Internet pages are functional simultaneously. Moreover, these records should possess adequate quality, enabling the determination of the date and time when the respective screenshots were captured or the corresponding videos were recorded.