The Arbitration Court of the Moscow District left unchanged the judicial acts of the first and appellate instances, which satisfied the application of the Principal of the Bureau of Lawyers “De jure” on procedural succession. At the court session, the lawyers of the Bureau managed to convince the court that procedural succession is possible even after the termination of the bankruptcy case, which served as the basis for leaving the judicial acts of the first and appellate instances unchanged. The interests of the Principal were represented by Valentina Petrova, Head of the Bankruptcy Dispute Resolution Practice of the Bureau of Lawyers “De jure”.
The Ninth Arbitration Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal of the procedural opponents of the Principal of the Bureau of Lawyers “De jure” and left unchanged the decision of the court of first instance. Within the framework of this case, the Moscow Arbitration Court fully satisfied the Principal’s requirements for determining the boundaries of the land plot to be leased to the owners of the building with a plurality of persons on the tenant’s side. The essence of the dispute was that one of the co-owners of the building, located on a land plot to be leased to all owners of the building, refused to coordinate the boundaries approved by the Moscow City Property Department. He believed that since his lease agreement was concluded in the early 90s, he had a preferential right to use the land plot, and by refusing to agree on the specified boundaries, he tried to prevent the conclusion of the lease agreement. However, these arguments were critically evaluated by the court and recognized as not worthy of attention. The legal position prepared by the staff of the Bureau was that none of the Defendant’s objections in any case can be an obstacle to the conclusion of a lease agreement with a plurality of persons on the tenant’s side, the limitation of ownership of the land plot in these relations has no legal significance, the boundaries of the land plot are established in accordance with the requirements of the law. The interests of the Principal were represented by Konstantin Tkachenko, Head of the practice of legal support of entrepreneurship of the Bureau of Lawyers “De jure”.