The Supreme Court of Russia sent back for review a case in which the Chinese Tank-300 was recognized as the closest analog to the UAZ "Patriot" in terms of consumer properties. According to court materials reviewed by TASS, the Ulyanovsk Automobile Plant proved that using a more expensive foreign car to calculate damages leads to unjust enrichment of the consumer and violates the principle of fairness.
A comparison of the key technical characteristics of the two models clearly shows why the court considered them incomparable in price:
| UAZ "Patriot" | Tank 300 | |
| Engine | gasoline, 2.7 L (ZMZ Pro) / turbodiesel, 2.0 L (Sollers) | gasoline, 2.0 L (turbo) |
| Power | 150 hp (gasoline) / 136 hp (diesel) | 218–220 hp |
| Torque | 235 Nm (gasoline) / 320 Nm (diesel) | 380 Nm |
| Transmission | 5-speed manual / 6-speed manual | 8-speed automatic |
| Drive | selectable 4WD (Part-Time) | 4WD (Part-Time / Torque-on-Demand) |
| Ground Clearance | 210 mm | 224 mm |
| Differential Locks | rear (option) | rear (standard), front (top trim) |
| Price (current) | ~1.9 million rubles | ~4.5 million rubles |
The price difference of more than double, with comparable consumer properties, became a key argument for the Supreme Court. The ruling emphasized that using a car from a different price category violates the principle of fairness and proportionality of responsibility. The case has been sent back for new consideration on appeal.
The dispute arose after the purchase of a "Patriot" in 2023 for 1.7 million rubles. During the warranty period, the car developed defects, and the factory voluntarily returned 2.2 million rubles to the buyer, including the cost of the car and damages. However, the woman went to court demanding to be paid the difference up to the price of a similar car. The court-appointed expert examination recognized the Tank-300 in the Adventure trim, with a market value of 4.1 million rubles, as such. UAZ appealed this decision and reached the Supreme Court.
The case has been sent back for new consideration on appeal. In fact, the Supreme Court established an important position for the automotive industry: when calculating consumer compensation, the price cannot be automatically adjusted to a more expensive segment, ignoring the difference in class and equipment.