August 19 Main results of the day

The Ninth Arbitration Court of Appeal upheld the earlier decision of the Moscow Arbitration Court, within the framework of which a collective claim was brought against the Principal of MCBA “Bureau of Lawyers “De jure” to declare certain terms of the supply agreement as not concluded. Earlier, the Moscow Arbitration Court agreed with the arguments of MCBA “Bureau of Lawyers “De jure” and refused 13 Plaintiffs – legal entities to satisfy the claim in full, having indicated that the Plaintiffs’ disagreement with the terms of the supply contracts concluded with the Defendant is not a basis for recognizing their separate provisions as not concluded. The Ninth Arbitration Court of Appeal also recognized the Bureau’s arguments as justified and noted that overcoming the court decision by adopting a new act entailing for the parties of the dispute, on which the court decision was previously made, other consequences than those determined by this court decision, means a violation of the judicial guarantees of rights and freedoms established by the Constitution of the Russian Federation, does not correspond to the very nature of justice, which is carried out only by the court, and is incompatible with the constitutional principles of independence of the judiciary, the independence of the court and its subordination only to the Constitution of the Russian Federation and Federal Law. The interests of the Principal were represented by Yakov Bulut, lawyer of MCBA “Bureau of Lawyers “De jure”.

The Odintsovo City Court of the Moscow Region refused to satisfy the Plaintiff’s initial claim for determining the child’s place of residence and satisfied the request of the Principal of MCBA “Bureau of Lawyers “De jure” to determine the place of residence of the minor daughter with the father. The interests of the Principal were represented by Vladimir Leonov, senior lawyer of MCBA “Bureau of Lawyers “De jure”.