October 16 Main results of the day

Victory in the court of appeal!

The lawyers of the Bureau of Lawyers “De jure” managed to prove the illegality of the bidding and to invalidate their result and the subsequently concluded contract of sale of real estate.

The Principal, through legal proceedings, forced the Moscow City Property Department to conclude a purchase and sale agreement with him for the premises located in a shopping center. The specified premise is adjoined by a landing stage, which actually performs the functions of an auxiliary premise in relation to the premise purchased by the Principal, although it is included in the Unified State Register of Real Estate as the main one.

The Bureau’s lawyers appealed to the court with a claim for the obligation to conclude an Additional Agreement to the purchase and sale agreement in order to buy out the landing stage, which was fully satisfied by the court. However, the department, without waiting for the court decision to come into legal force, at the stage of appeal in the case regarding the conclusion of the additional agreement, held an auction, through which it sold the disputed premises to a third party. In this regard, a new lawsuit was filed to invalidate the results of the auction.

During the proceedings in the appellate court, it was possible to prove the fact of bad faith behavior on the part of the Department and the illegality of the alienation of property, the right to which is currently being challenged in court. An additional argument in favor of the Principal was the buyer’s unreliable business reputation and the dishonesty of the Moscow Department of City Property.

This victory is an intermediate, but, nevertheless, a necessary step towards acquiring the Principal’s right of ownership of the landing stage, without which the execution of the court decision on the transfer of the disputed premises into ownership would have been impossible.

The Arbitration Court of the Moscow District found our arguments to be justified and rejected the customer’s cassation appeal. Another victory in a construction dispute!

The Principal contacted us for the purpose of his protection in a contract dispute against the unfounded demand of the customer to collect a penalty of more than 20 million rubles for the delay in the performance of work and counter-collection from the customer of the debt for the work performed and compensation for the purchase of building materials.

We have supported this dispute in the first and appellate instances, having completely rejected the customer’s demands and fully recovered the debt in favor of the contractor.

The other day, the cassation complaint of the customer was considered, who, having resigned himself to losing in lower courts, appealed the judicial acts to the cassation only in terms of collecting the contractor’s expenses for the construction materials purchased by him in the amount of 1.9 million rubles, asking the court to transfer the dispute for a new consideration.

In court, the customer claimed that he had not agreed with the contractor on the purchase of building materials and had not entered into an agreement on this.

Maria managed to convince the three judges that, despite the lack of agreement between the parties on the purchase of materials by the contractor, the costs incurred by him were subject to compensation by the customer.

The result was a complete victory – the opponent’s cassation appeal was denied, and the debt collected in favor of our client for work and building materials in the amount of more than 13 million rubles was fully received.

Executor: Maria Ovchinnikova, Head of the Department of Legal Support for Contractual and Judicial Work of the Bureau of Lawyers “De jure”.

And another victory in a construction contract!

In a court dispute on challenging the unilateral refusal of the Moscow Region City administration from a municipal contract for the performance of work on the construction of an extension to a school in Odintsovo, we managed to prove the absence of guilt of the contractor in violating the deadlines for the performance of work under the municipal contract due to the violations of its duties by the administration, including the recognition of the initial design documentation as improper and requiring adjustment.

During eight court sessions, we actively defended our position on the dispute, proving to the court the dishonesty in the actions of the administration and the inability of the contractor to perform the work on time. Each session was lengthy, with each side voicing and proving their positions, and the scales of Themis were constantly tipping in different directions. But we managed to prove the correctness of our position and refute all the arguments of the administration, resulting in a complete victory – the contractor’s claim was satisfied, the municipal customer’s unilateral refusal of the contract was declared invalid by the court.

Executor: Maria Ovchinnikova, Head of the Department of Legal Support for Contractual and Judicial Work of the Bureau of Lawyers “De jure”.