August 18 Main results of the day

The Moscow City Arbitration Court refused to satisfy the Defendant’s application to reduce the amount of the court penalty and to recognize the court decision rendered in this case as executed. Earlier, in the framework of a corporate dispute, the Moscow Arbitration Court satisfied the requirements of the Principal of the Bureau of Lawyers “De jure” and ordered the Defendant to provide the Principal with documents relating to the activities of the company in which the Principal is one of the participants. The court also collected from the Defendant a court penalty in the amount of 10 thousand rubles for each day of non-execution of the court decision. Having partially executed the decision, the Defendant applied to the court for a reduction of the penalty to 2 thousand rubles and recognition of the decision as executed. Lawyers of the Bureau prepared motivated objections that no abuse of the right was allowed on the part of the Principal, nevertheless, the Defendant executed the decision improperly and not in full, and the issue of reducing the penalty has already been the subject of consideration of the case and cannot be considered again. As a result, the Moscow City Arbitration Court agreed with the position of the Bureau of Lawyers “De jure” and refused to satisfy the Defendant’s application in full. The interests of the Principal were represented by Marina Nikolaenko, head of practice of the Bureau of Lawyers “De jure”.

The justice of the peace of court district No. 325 of the Moscow Region satisfied the application of the Client of the Bureau of Lawyers “De jure” for the issuance of a court order and the restoration of the deadline for its presentation. Lawyers of the Bureau of Lawyers “De jure” managed to prove that the need to issue a duplicate of the court order and restore the deadline for presentation arose due to the illegal inaction of the bailiff service, which not only lost the writ of execution, but also delayed the issuance of a certificate of its loss, as a result of which the deadline to present a writ of execution for execution expired. The Client’s interests were represented by Ekaterina Bulygina, senior lawyer of the Bureau of Lawyers “De jure”.