March 26 Main results of the day

The Moscow Arbitration Court resolved the dispute in favor of the contractor under the service agreement.

Between the customers (opponents) and the contractor (Principal), contracts for the provision of services were concluded, according to which the Principal was obliged to disseminate information in all possible ways about the products sold by the customers. Customers carried out entrepreneurial activities according to the network marketing model, and, according to the terms of the contract, the more the Principal managed to attract buyers, the more he received a reward for the services rendered (some branches of attracted people were created, in which each newly arrived buyer attracted subsequent buyers, and the person who created all these branches received interest from the purchase).

The amount of remuneration was being calculated by the customer himself and reflected in the personal account of the relevant contractor. Over time, customers (operating through four affiliated legal entities) did not fully pay for services to the Principal, and therefore an impressive debt to the Principal accumulated in their personal account. Oral conversations and demands to pay the debt did not give a result, and therefore, in order not to pay for services, the customers blocked the Principal’s personal account in order to exclude the possibility of proving the presence of a debt. However, the Principal, predicting the dispute, managed to videotape the availability of customers’ debt to him, where the personal account and the amount of debt were recorded. At the same time, the amount of remuneration was being calculated by the customer himself and reflected in the personal account.

As a result of a long-term legal dispute (about 9 months), Ruslan Katana, a lawyer of the practice of economic disputes, managed to convince the court of first instance that the Defendants were abusing their right and hiding the debt in every possible way, while the amount of the debt was reflected on the video. The Defendants were unable to refute the Plaintiff’s arguments.

As a result, the Moscow Arbitration Court satisfied the claims of the Principal for debt collection in the amount of more than 446,000 euros from 4 Defendants in solidarity manner.