{"id":33441,"date":"2020-12-24T12:39:00","date_gmt":"2020-12-24T09:39:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/de-ure.ru\/en\/?p=33441"},"modified":"2020-12-30T12:41:04","modified_gmt":"2020-12-30T09:41:04","slug":"december-24-main-results-of-the-day","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/de-ure.ru\/en\/2020\/12\/24\/december-24-main-results-of-the-day\/","title":{"rendered":"December 24      Main results of the day"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p>Bailiffs returned the unlawfully collected debt in the amount of 1.25 million rubles to the Client of MCBA \u201cBureau of Lawyers \u201cDe jure\u201d. In December 2019, the Moscow Arbitration Court satisfied the claim of Mosenergosbyt to recover funds with reference to unaccounted electricity consumption. In March 2020, the Ninth Arbitration Court of Appeal moved to considering the case in accordance with the rules established for the consideration of the case in the court of the first instance, and suspended the execution of the decision of the court of the first instance.\u00a0 But despite this, in August of this year, bailiffs debited the funds from the account of the Bureau&#8217;s Client. And in December of this year, the Ninth Arbitration Court canceled the decision in full and dismissed the Plaintiff&#8217;s claim in full, while actually making the conclusion that unaccounted consumption took place, but it was the result of unqualified actions of Mosenergosbyt employees.\u00a0 The interests of the Client in the arbitration case and in the enforcement proceedings were represented by Rashid Gitinov, Head of the Arbitration Disputes Practice of MCBA \u201cBureau of Lawyers \u201cDe jure\u201d.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Bailiffs returned the unlawfully collected debt in the amount of 1.25 million rubles to the Client of MCBA \u201cBureau of Lawyers \u201cDe jure\u201d. In December 2019, the Moscow Arbitration Court satisfied the claim of Mosenergosbyt to recover funds with reference to unaccounted electricity consumption. In March 2020, the Ninth Arbitration Court of Appeal moved to&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\/33441"}],"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=33441"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/de-ure.ru\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/33441\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":33442,"href":"https:\/\/de-ure.ru\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/33441\/revisions\/33442"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/de-ure.ru\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=33441"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/de-ure.ru\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=33441"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/de-ure.ru\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=33441"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}