Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 22 January 2013 № 11696/12 in the case The company “Rusal Krasnoyarsk Aluminium Plant” vs The Government of the Russian Federation
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Whether Government of the Russian Federation should be regarded as a “federal body of executive power” and, consequently, whether its actions, including the issuance of normative acts, may be subject to judicial review for the purposes of the Law on the Protection of Competition?
Subject areas:
The Information Letter of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 15 January 2013 № 153 “A Survey of Court Practice on Certain Issues Regarding the Protection of Owner’s Rights Against Breaches Not Entailing Dispossession”
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 25 December 2012 № 8488/12 in the case The company “Business-Pravo” vs The judicial bailiff-executor Anton Minich
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: whether judicial bailiff-executor is obliged to respond in writing to requests from parties to execution proceedings?
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 25 December 2012 № 10765/12 in the case The company “Petrovkagazstroy” vs The Interdistrict Inspection of the Federal Tax Service № 9 in Tambov region
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: whether or not the right of tax office to suspend bank operations of a taxpayer is a separate securing measure?
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 25 December 2012 № 10292/12 in the case The company “Jacobson Heritage Development” et al. vs The company “Karat”
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law 1: whether the floating pledge (“pledge of goods in circulation”, Art 357, Civil Code) may have priority over a common (or “firm”) pledge (the pledge of individually specified items) in the event of there being competing claims which flow from these two kinds of security interests (liens)?
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 11 December 2012 № 4340/12 in the case The company “Stroygarant” vs The company “Real Estate Agency “Zhilishnyi Vopros”
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: which judicial instance should reconsider a case on the basis of new circumstances – the court which adopted the judicial act to be reconsidered or the higher instance court which subsequently endorsed that act?
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 11 December 2012 № 9604/12 in the case The company “Sibir Tranzitnefteprovod” vs The company “Karkade”
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: from which moment should start the term for filing a complaint to cassational court if earlier an appellate court has refused to restore the missed term for appeal?
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 4 December 2012 № 8989/12 in the case The company Almaz-Antey vs The Kirov Regional Directorate of the Federal Service for State Registration, Cadastre and Cartography
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: whether a transaction on the transfer of assets from a subsidiary to its mother company without any consideration is admissible?
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 4 December 2012 № 11277/12 in the case The company “Melnitsa XXI vek” vs The Russian Author’s Society (RAO)
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: how specific should be the subject of a license contract concluded under Art 1243 of the Civil Code between the user of a musical composition (licensee) and the accredited organization for the management of rights on the collective basis (RАО), in order to be recognised as being agreed upon?
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 27 November 2012 № 8651/12 in the case The entrepreneur Guliamov vs The Astrakhan Directorate of Federal Migration Service
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: whether a court may substitute an administrative fine imposed upon entrepreneur with the suspension of activity (considered by law as a more strict punishment), based only on the entrepreneur’s own desire?
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 27 November 2012 № 8039/12 in the case The company “Joint Enterprise “Pamiat” vs The Volgograd Regional Branch of the Federal Antitrust Service
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: the meaning of the requirement that a request of the antitrust body to submit documents should be “reasoned”.
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 27 November 2012 № 9021/12 in the case The company “Mosoblavtodor” vs The company “Rosgosstrah”
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: whether debtor ought to perform properly his obligation to pay, even though he did not have information on the new bank account of the creditor.
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 20 November 2012 № 8953/12 in the case The company “Oktiabrskoe pole” vs The company “Trading house “Perekrestok”
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: whether the seller of a magazine, in which an object of intellectual property right (specifically, a photo) was placed may be held liable for it?
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 13 November 2012 № 8141/12 in the case Leasing company “Uralsib” vs The company “Novosibirsk Autotsentr Kamaz”
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Points of law: 1) whether arbitration court may have jurisdiction over a suit filed by lessor against lessee (debtor) after the start of bankruptcy procedures with regard to the debtor? 2) whether affiliation of the arbitration court with one of the parties to the dispute is permissible?
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 13 November 2012 № 6813/12 in the case The entrepreneur Sergey Chudov vs The Vladivostok customs office
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: whether customs office was right in suspending the importation of goods with a trade mark registered in the customs database of IP rights, provided that the first sale of such goods has already taken place in another country?
Subject areas:
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.