October 31 Main results of the day

The Moscow Arbitration Court preserved the Principal’s outbuilding. Refusing to satisfy the claim of the Moscow Government and the Moscow City Property Department against the Principal, the court agreed with the arguments of the lawyers of the Bureau of Lawyers “De jure” about the presence of contradictions and lack of objectivity in the conclusions of experts made according to the results of the conducted forensic construction and technical expertise. In particular, the Bureau’s lawyers drew the court’s attention to the fact that the expert independently went beyond the scope of the subject of forensic expertise (instead of assessing the outbuilding for compliance with the requirements of urban planning and other norms and regulations, the expert assessed the entire building of the Principal); did not make measurements or a sufficient number of images to substantiate his conclusions; applied non-applicable building codes and regulations; unreasonably came to the conclusion that the identified violations are irreparable in a situation that clearly indicates the remediability of such violations (for example, if it is possible to purchase a sufficient amount of fire extinguishing equipment, personal protective equipment, increasing the width of the doorway, etc.). It is noteworthy that the request of the lawyers of the Bureau of Lawyers “De jure” to conduct a repeated judicial construction and technical examination in the case was refused, but in general the result of the dispute was certainly in favor of the Principal. The interests of the Principal were represented by Rashid Gitinov, Head of the practice of dispute resolution with state bodies of the Bureau of Lawyers “De jure”.