{"id":33439,"date":"2020-12-23T12:38:00","date_gmt":"2020-12-23T09:38:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/de-ure.ru\/en\/?p=33439"},"modified":"2020-12-30T12:39:02","modified_gmt":"2020-12-30T09:39:02","slug":"december-23-main-results-of-the-day","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/de-ure.ru\/en\/2020\/12\/23\/december-23-main-results-of-the-day\/","title":{"rendered":"December 23      Main results of the day"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p>The Second\nCassation Court of General Jurisdiction, upon the complaint of MCBA\n\u201cBureau of Lawyers \u201cDe jure\u201d, canceled the ruling of the Moscow City Court in\nthe case of foreclosure on the pledged property of the Client of the Bureau and\nsent this issue for new consideration. The specialists of the Bureau managed to\nprove that the actual value of the pledged property is much less than that\nestablished by the court of first instance, as a result of which the rights of\nthe pledgee are violated.&nbsp; The interests\nof the pledgee in this case were represented by Sergey Bibikov, senior lawyer\nof the Bureau. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The Moscow\nArbitration Court in full denied the procedural opponents of MCBA \u201cBureau of\nLawyers \u201cDe jure\u201d to satisfy the claim for debt collection.&nbsp; The amount of the initial claim was over 2.6\nmillion rubles, but during the trial the lawyers of the Bureau managed to prove\nthe legality of the offset of the Principal debt, interest and compensation for\nnon-collection of goods made by our Client.&nbsp;\nThe interests of the Client were represented by Yakov Bulut, lawyer of MCBA \u201cBureau\nof Lawyers \u201cDe jure\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The Ninth\nArbitration Court of Appeal left unchanged the earlier decision of the Moscow Arbitration\nCourt, which fully satisfied the claim of the Bureau&#8217;s Client to recover the\ndebt under supply contracts in the amount of 2.2 million rubles.&nbsp; The interests of the Client were represented\nby Ramzan Mezhidov, lawyer\nof MCBA \u201cBureau of Lawyers \u201cDe jure\u201d.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The Second Cassation Court of General Jurisdiction, upon the complaint of MCBA \u201cBureau of Lawyers \u201cDe jure\u201d, canceled the ruling of the Moscow City Court in the case of foreclosure on the pledged property of the Client of the Bureau and sent this issue for new consideration. The specialists of the Bureau managed to prove&hellip;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[111],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/de-ure.ru\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/33439"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/de-ure.ru\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/de-ure.ru\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/de-ure.ru\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/de-ure.ru\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=33439"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/de-ure.ru\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/33439\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":33440,"href":"https:\/\/de-ure.ru\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/33439\/revisions\/33440"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/de-ure.ru\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=33439"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/de-ure.ru\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=33439"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/de-ure.ru\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=33439"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}