August 31 Main results of the day

The Odintsovo City Court of the Moscow Region satisfied the Bank’s claims to recognize as illegal the inaction of the senior bailiff of the Odintsovo District Department of Bailiffs of the Main Directorate of the Federal Bailiff Service of Russia for the Moscow Region due to the failure to initiate three enforcement proceedings. The lawyers of the Bureau of Lawyers “De jure” managed to convince the court that the inaction of the bailiffs, which has been going on for more than 8 months, is expressed not only in the failure to initiate enforcement proceedings, but also in the failure to provide information about the location of the enforcement document, as a result of which the Claimant is deprived of the opportunity to apply for duplicate of the writ of execution in case of its loss. As a result, the court ordered the senior bailiff to provide the Claimant with information about the initiation or refusal to initiate enforcement proceedings, as well as information about the location of the enforcement documents. The interests of the Client of the Bureau were represented by Ekaterina Bulygina, senior lawyer of the Bureau of Lawyers “De jure”.

The Moscow Arbitration Court considered a case on the protection of the honor, dignity of individuals and the business reputation of a legal entity in connection with the publication by the Principal of the Bureau of Lawyers “De jure” of information on Instagram (the social network is prohibited in the Russian Federation) regarding the activities of the Company, its Director and Participant. According to the Plaintiffs, the post published by the Defendant on the social network presented them in a negative light, and the facts indicated in the post did not actually take place. In fact, this publication appeared on the fact of a corporate conflict between the participants of the company, which could not be resolved at the negotiating table. Based on the results of the process, the arbitration court partially satisfied the Plaintiffs’ claims, reducing the amount of compensation by 10 times and refusing to recover the court penalty in full (from 25 to 50 thousand rubles per week in the first three weeks and with a subsequent increase by 25% for each subsequent week). In addition to a significant reduction in requirements, the lawyers of the Bureau managed to prove that some of the published information was presented in the form of value judgments that do not require verification for compliance with reality and are not subject to legal protection. The court also agreed with the Bureau’s argument that forcing the defendant by the court to carry out any publications on a resource prohibited in the Russian Federation is a direct violation of the law. The interests of the Defendant in this complex case were represented by Sergey Bibikov, senior lawyer of the Bureau of Lawyers “De jure”, and Marina Nikolaenko, Head of the practice.

The Sixteenth Arbitration Court of Appeal confirmed the legality of the ruling of the court of first instance, which refused an individual entrepreneur, a friendly debtor, to include his imaginary claim in the amount of 4.7 million rubles to the register of creditors’ claims, which will protect our Principal from abuse by the debtor related to illegitimate control over the bankruptcy procedure and participation through such a creditor in the distribution of the bankruptcy estate. In the court of first instance, the lawyers of the Bureau of Lawyers “De jure” proved the groundlessness of the requirements from the supply contract. In the next separate dispute, the court of appeal refused to satisfy the appeals of the debtor, the sole participant and the former head of the bankrupt, and also left unchanged the refusal decision of the first instance, which did not allow invalidating all decisions of the first meeting of the debtor’s creditors. Thus, the debtor’s abuses related to the desire to delay the moment of introduction of bankruptcy proceedings were suppressed, which would allow satisfying the Principal’s monetary claims in the shortest possible time and in the maximum amount. The interests of the Principal were represented by Roman Volkomorov, lawyer of the Tyumen branch of the Bureau of Lawyers “De jure”.