Armed Forces: General practitioners' offices cannot purchase furniture that is not provided for by standards

The dispute began in January 2024, when the Unified Customer Service filed a claim with the Pervomaisky District Court of Krasnodar against the regional Department of Financial and Budgetary Supervision to invalidate the latter's submission of July 2023. The defendant conducted an on-site inspection in early 2023, during which it discovered violations in the activities of the Unified Customer Service. According to the inspectors, the department allowed the misuse of 557 thousand and 874 thousand rubles for the purchase of equipment, furniture and inventory for equipping general practitioner offices under construction in the village of Bratsky and in the village of Yugo-Severnaya. The purchased products, according to the regulator, were not provided for by the Standard for equipping a general practitioner center, included in the Regulation on the organization of primary health care for the adult population of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation.

Due to the violations identified, the Department of Financial and Budgetary Supervision issued a representation to the Unified Customer Service, in which it demanded the return of 1.4 million rubles to the budget of Krasnodar Krai. The Service decided to challenge the sanction. The district court transferred the case to the Arbitration Court (AC) of Krasnodar Krai.

The plaintiff asked the court to involve the regional Ministry of Health, the Tikhoretsky District Administration and the Tikhoretskaya Central Regional Hospital as third parties. The application for funds for the construction and equipment of medical centers was approved by the local Ministry of Health and the administration. The equipment, furniture and inventory purchased with them were transferred to the district hospital for use. The Arbitration Court of Krasnodar Krai nevertheless refused to involve third parties in the trial.

In July 2024, the court also refused to satisfy the claim. “Appendix No. 23 of Standard No. 543n provides for equipping the general medical practice center (department) with special-purpose medical refrigerators (for storing medications and for storing vaccines), as well as, if there is a day hospital: beds/couches for the day hospital (as needed, paragraph 26); chairs for the day hospital (1 per 1 bed, paragraph 28); wardrobes for outerwear for the day hospital (1 per 4 beds, paragraph 29),” the decision of the Arbitration Court of Krasnodar Krai states.

The plaintiff, in turn, purchased 3 refrigerators, including 2 medical and one household. At the same time, the general practitioner's office in the village of Bratsky did not have a day hospital, which is why a household refrigerator, 12 chairs and 2 wardrobes for outerwear were purchased in violation of the standard. The list of disputed goods also included benches, a dining table, hand dryers, hygiene dispensers, pedal bins, computer mice, keyboards and other products. A similar situation arose when equipping a medical office in the village of Yugo-Severnaya.

The court of first instance also emphasized that the presence of disputed furniture and inventory in the local estimate, which received a positive conclusion from the state expert review, is not a justification for unlawful expenditure.

Later, in September 2024, the Unified Customer Service of the Tikhoretsky District was also refused by the 15th Arbitration Court of Appeal. In December 2024, the cassation appeal was rejected by the North Caucasus District Arbitration Court, and in April 2025, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation made a similar decision.

In early March 2025, courts of three instances ruled that the mere presence of high-tech or resuscitation equipment in a clinic does not mean that it is possible to apply higher rates for paying for medical care under the compulsory medical insurance system - for this, it is necessary to actually use the equipment during treatment. Tariffs with an increased coefficient were applied by the Maternity Hospital in Ivanovo, although, as the courts and auditors found out, resuscitation equipment was not used during treatment. After the auditors demanded that part of the funds be returned, the maternity hospital, as well as the Ivanovo Region Department of Health, unsuccessfully tried to challenge the order. The medical institution claimed that the use of compulsory medical insurance rates specially created by the region was necessary to cover the costs of servicing the said equipment.