BY A DECISION OF ZAMOSKVORETSKY DISTRICT COURT OF MOSCOW, THE CLAIM AGAINST OUR PRINCIPAL WAS DENIED, AND OUR COUNTERCLAIM WAS SATISFIED IN FULL

MCBA “Bureau of Lawyers “De jure” protects the rights and legitimate interests of one of the prestigious educational institutions of Moscow – “P”.

The Plaintiff (citizen K*) appealed to court of Moscow and filed a statement of claim against the Defendant (our Principal) on the refund of money for the education of her child, as well as the amount of unjust enrichment, interest for using someone else’s money, a fine in the amount of 50% awarded by the court from the amount of damage, compensation for moral damage, costs of paying for the services of a representative in the total amount of 1 000 000, 00 rubles.

Lawyers of MCBA “Bureau of Lawyers “De Jure” got acquainted in detail with the materials of this civil case as well as all the essential circumstances, prepared and filed reasoned Objections to the statement of claim as well as the Counterclaim to citizen “K” about the recovery of funds for additional education of her child and the amount of damage caused to the Principal by damage to his property.

In addition, lawyer of MCBA “Bureau of Lawyers “De jure” called witnesses on the part of our Principal to judicial interrogation, as a result of which they confirmed all essential circumstances necessary for full and correct consideration of the present case.

Coming to the conclusion about refusal in satisfaction of claim requirements of our opponent, the court proceeded from the fact that all the necessary information regarding conduct of educational activities, the list of services and obligations taken by our Principal under the Agreement and other conditions for the services provided, including additional services, had been brought to the Plaintiff’s attention.

According to the documents presented by us to the materials of this case and taking into account the testimonies of the interrogated witnesses, which are consistent with each other and with the written evidence in the case, Zamoskvoretsky District Court of Moscow concluded that our Principal, in the performance of his obligations under the Agreement on the provision of educational services, has not committed violations of the requirements of Article 309-310 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, as well as the terms of the Agreement concluded between the parties.

According to the counterclaim, the court found that on the basis of the application of citizen “K” additional classes were held and she was acquainted with the cost and conditions of them, the debt for payment was documented.

On the basis of the evidence presented to the materials of this case, it followed that damage to the property of the educational institution was recorded by the act drawn up by authorized representatives of our Principal and these circumstances were confirmed by testimonies.

Thus, considering the Defendant’s counterclaims for the recovery of debt from the Plaintiff for the payment of her son’s education and damage, the court found them to be satisfied on the basis of their legality and justification.

The court’s decision in the present case entered into force.

Lawyer of MCBA “Bureau of Lawyers “De-jure” Y.M.Martynenko  has prepared the legal position on this case and represented the Defendant’s interests in Zamoskvoretsky District Court of Moscow.