Be it resolved: Finders keepers

Law360 Canada (November 14, 2025, 2:38 PM EST) --

Marcel Strigberger

Ever hear of a place in Russia called Khanty-Mansiysk? Didn’t think so. Vladimir Rychagov was a factory worker there, until he hit the jackpot, or rather helped himself to it. Through a software glitch, his employer deposited into his bank account the salaries of 34 of its employees, being over seven million rubles instead of about 47,000 rubles, which is $87,000 instead of $581. Vlad, however, refuses to return the slight excess.

He argues that there were rumours that the company had a good year and that there would be a bonus or “13th salary” paid to the workers. As the bank reference referred to the deposit as “salary,” he was not at all surprised. He figured it must have been a very prosperous year.

He also noted that he did some research on the internet and found that there were errors and there were errors. If the error was a “billing” error, he was obligated to repay it. However, if it was a “technical” mistake, repaying it was optional. I guess the option he elected is not totally surprising.

This distinction fascinated me. I could not find it online. I decided to ask my always-knowledgeable legal expert Siri. Her answer was, “How do I get on that company’s payroll?”

The company actually sued Vladimir for a return of the funds. The first instance court ordered a return of the windfall, as did the appeals court. He then appealed to the Supreme Court, where interestingly the case was “accepted for consideration.” I know nyet about Russian law but to me, applying an analogy to Canadian law, it almost sounds like the Russian Supreme Court has granted the defendant leave to appeal. I wonder what Vladimir’s factum looks like:


Incidentally, I actually had a case of this type shortly after I started my practice decades ago. A gentleman attended my office saying that his bank inadvertently deposited about $10,000 into his account and they wanted it back. I asked him why he was seeing a lawyer about this matter and he replied, “Can you figure out a way how I can keep the money?”

I recall our meeting was not lengthy. My advice to him was obvious. I would have nothing to do with this guy. Then again, those were the days before lawyers were able to work on a file on contingency. Thirty per cent of 10 grand in the 1970s would not have been a bad fee. Banks can afford the hit. Even Shakespeare said in Titus Adronicus, “A slice off a cut loaf is never missed.” But I digress.

I understand there was actually a similar employer overpayment salary glitch in Chile a few years back, where the company erroneously paid its worker wages the equivalent in pesos of $180,000, instead of $542. I wanted to compare the two cases but unlike Vladimir Rychagov, the man in Chile disappeared with the cash. Ergo I can’t go much further as I would want to compare borscht to borscht.

And what is the takeaway from this story? At least we all now have heard about Khanty-Mansiysk.

Marcel Strigberger retired from his Greater Toronto Area litigation practice and continues the more serious business of humorous author and speaker. His book, Boomers, Zoomers, and Other Oomers: A Boomer-biased Irreverent Perspective on Aging, is available on Amazon (e-book) and in paper version. His new(!) book First, Let’s Kill the Lawyer Jokes: An Attorney’s Irreverent Serious Look at the Legal Universe is available on Amazon, Apple and other book places. Visit www.marcelshumour.com. Follow him on X @MarcelsHumour.

The opinions expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the author’s firm, its clients, Law360 Canada, LexisNexis Canada or any of its or their respective affiliates. This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal advice.

Interested in writing for us? To learn more about how you can add your voice to Law360 Canada, contact Analysis Editor Peter Carter at peter.carter@lexisnexis.ca or call 647-776-6740.