July 8. MAIN RESULTS OF THE DAY

The Arbitration Court of Primorsky Krai recovered from the agent of the insurance company debt in the amount of RUB 90 million. Lawyers of MCBA “Bureau of Lawyers “De Jure” Ekaterina Rusakova, Murad Agayev, Evgeny Mikhailov prepared legal position and took part in the trial.

Krasnodar Regional Court left unchanged the act of the first instance on the refusal of the Plaintiff in the claim to invalidate the pledge agreement concluded with the Bank. The Bank’s interests were represented by Marina Nikolaenko, lawyer of “De jure”.

As part of the bankruptcy case of an individual, the Arbitration court of Tyumen region included In the register the Bank’s claims for the sum more than 50 million rubles. The Bank’s interests were represented by Ksenia Stikhina, lawyer of the Tyumen division of “De jure”.

Primorsky regional court left unchanged the decision of the Leninsky district court of Vladivostok, which collected 3 million rubles of debt and interest for using borrowed funds. The former Deputy Director of the insurance company was receiving the money from the cash register under report and did not return it. And shortly before the bankruptcy, the company allegedly “forgave” the debt. Lawyers “De jure” in the beginning disputed the deal on the debt forgiveness. Then a claim was filed on behalf of the bankruptcy Trustee for recovery of unjust enrichment. The Defendant referred to the fact that he was in an employment relationship with the company and, therefore, it is necessary to apply the reduced (one-year) limitation period, which by that time has expired. In addition, in his opinion, the procedure for identifying debt established by labor legislation was not followed.  Employees of MCBA “Bureau of Lawyers “De Jure” were able to prove that the claim against the debtor is exclusively civil in nature, the claim is based on a contested transaction, and not on an employment relationship, and, therefore, the limitation period is three years. However, employment issues, including, for example, the existence of a full liability agreement, should not be taken into account. The court of appeal agreed with the Plaintiff’s arguments. The preparation of procedural documents was handled Ekaterina Rusakova, lawyer of “De jure”, and in court the interests of the Principals were represented by “De jure” lawyer Yevgeny Mikhailov.

The arbitration court of Primorsky Krai refused the IFNS for the Frunzensky district of Vladivostok to include in the register of claims for 6.45 million rubles for administrative fines (in total – more than 200 fines). Previously, employees of MCBA “Bureau of Lawyers “De Jure” successfully challenged the fines, filing applications for review for each of them on newly discovered circumstances. Such a circumstance was the Decision of the constitutional court of the Russian Federation, which recognized that violations for which there is a special extended period of one year for prosecution, described very vaguely. Having proved that the usual three-month period of bringing to responsibility should be applied in cases, “De jure” achieved the cancellation of fines, which led to the refusal to include the requirements of the tax Inspectorate in the register of creditors of the insurance company. The penalty trials were conducted by Oscar Bareev, lawyer of “De jure”. The interests of the bankruptcy Trustee in the bankruptcy case were represented by lawyer of “De jure” Eugene Mikhailov.

Perovsky district court of Moscow fully satisfied the requirements of the bankruptcy Trustee of the Bank – the Principal of “De jure” and issued a decision on joint recovery from the Company and its guarantor of the debt under the loan agreement in the amount of 6.4 million rubles. In the course of the proceedings, the court dismissed the Defendants’ requests for falsification of evidence, as well as a counterclaim for recognition of the guarantee agreement as not concluded. The interests of the bankruptcy Trustee were represented by Yaroslav Baldin, lawyer MCBA “Bureau of Lawyers “De Jure”.

The Moscow city court upheld the decision of the Butyrsky district court of Moscow, which refused to satisfy the claim to the client of MCBA “Bureau of Lawyers “De Jure” to recognize the assignment agreement as invalid. The lawsuit asked the wife of the assignor with reference to the agreement on section jointly acquired property for which the spouse transferred the disputed rights of claim under assignment worth over 20 million rubles. The interests of the Defendant were represented by lawyer of MCBA “Bureau of Lawyers “De Jure” Rashid Gitinov.