June 3. MAIN RESULTS OF THE DAY

The court recognized the right of the Principal of MCBA “Bureau of Lawyers “De Jure” to a land plot and a residential building. The real estate went to the client of the Bureau by will, but it turned out that the property right to the land plot was not registered by the testator, since the Rosreestr removed it from the cadastral register. On this basis, the state authorities refused to issue a certificate of inheritance. Our lawyers prepared and filed a claim for the restoration of the archival cadastral number of the land plot and for recognition of its ownership. After that, Rosreestr restored the number of the land plot, and the court recognized the ownership right. The Client’s interests were represented by Yakov Bulut, lawyer of MCBA “Bureau of Lawyers “De Jure”.

The Eighth Arbitration Court of Appeal sided with the Client of MCBA “Bureau of Lawyers “De Jure” and refused to the procedural opponents to appeal the decision of the first instance court. Earlier, the Arbitration Court of the Tyumen Region agreed with the legal position of the Bank – Principal of “De Jure” and excluded from the register of creditors’ claims those claims that the Bank itself recognized as subject to exclusion. Persons controlling the debtor in the appeal asked the exclusion of all requirements of the Bank.  The client’s interests were represented by Ksenia Stikhina, lawyer of the Tyumen branch of “De Jure”.

On June 3, 2020, Zamoskvoretsky District Court of Moscow put an end to the case of a police officer accused of committing a crime under item “a” of part 5 of Article 290 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. According to investigators, the officer received a bribe for that he together with his colleagues “turned a blind eye” to violations of the bribe giver. This Article provides for punishment from 7 to 12 years in prison with the possibility of additionally imposing a fine of 10 times the size of a bribe, as well as with the deprivation of the right to occupy certain positions or engage in certain activities for up to ten years. The Lawyers of MCBA “Bureau of Lawyers “De Jure” managed to focus the Court’s attention on the extenuating circumstances of the case and the inapplicability of circumstances aggravating guilt. As a result, the Court, guided by the provisions of Article 64 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (“Assignment of a milder sentence than provided for this crime”), sentenced the Defendant to 4 years of imprisonment with deprivation of the right to hold office for a term of two years. The Court did not impose an additional penalty in the form of a fine.