• A
  • A
  • A
  • ABC
  • ABC
  • ABC
  • А
  • А
  • А
  • А
  • А
Regular version of the site
Search

Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 18 June 2013 № 17630/12 in the case The company “Veststroy” et al. vs The company “Sadovo-Spasskoe” et al. 

From which moment the period of limitation should run in case of an unauthorised construction, given that the object of construction has yet been registered in the State Register?

Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 28 May 2013 № 17085/12  in the case Administration of Temriuk district vs Mikhail Radzievski, an entrepreneur

Points of law: 1) whether buildings and structures erected by the owner of land plot, but not registered by him in the State Register of Rights to Immovables (hereinafter: the Register), may be considered as his property? 2) whether a football pitch situated on a land plot is a separate object of real estate, the right to which may be registered? 3) may a court give its own qualification to an object, which has been registered as a real estate? 4) under which circumstances a lease-holder of a land plot may acquire the right of ownership to objects erected by him on this land plot?

Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 28 May 2013 № 17481/12 in the case Saint-Petersburg Union of Composers vs The Saint-Petersburg Directorate of the Federal Agency for Managing State Property 

Whether non-commercial organisation may be a trustee manager under a contract of trust management of property which had been concluded before the adoption of Chapter 53 of the Civil Code which removed such opportunity for non-commercial organizations?

Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 2 April 2013 № 11980/12 in the case Ru-Center vs Federal Antitrust Service

Whether registration of popular domain names in RU zone, selected on the basis of submitted applications, by the accredited registrar for himself, and the subsequent sale thereof in a closed auction may be regarded as a fair competition on the part of the registrar?

Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 26 March 2013 № 14828/12 in the case Condominium "Skakovaya 5" vs The company "Arteks Corporation"

Points of law: 1) whether findings having pre-judicial significance should be set out in reasoned part of court decision or only in the resolutive one? 2) how the burden of proof should be apportioned by a court if there are reasons to believe that a party to the dispute, an offshore company, abuses the law – namely, it hides its affiliation with a party to an earlier dispute having pre-judicial significance, with the purpose of overcoming pre-judicial effect of the previous decision by appearing as a new party in the later dispute on the same issues.

 

Have you spotted a typo?
Highlight it, click Ctrl+Enter and send us a message. Thank you for your help!
To be used only for spelling or punctuation mistakes.