Decision of the Supreme Commercial Court of 11 April 2012 № ВАС-308/12
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: whether the amount of the State duty to be paid for the adoption of a decision concerning an objection against the issuance of a patent may be different for residents and non-residents?
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 10 April 2012 № 15085/11 in the case The company “Russian Forest Group” vs Sberbank
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: 1) how is limited the right of the pledgeholder to reduce 10-days period of time which the law gives him in order to cease the sale of the object of pledge by performing the obligation which has been secured by the pledge? 2) whether an executive note of the notary is required for the purposes of compulsory levy of execution on the object of pledge (securities), given that the depositary and pledgeholder are different persons?
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 3 April 2012 № 15483/11 in the case The company Ulianovsk Motor Plant vs The Interdistrict Inspection of the Federal Tax Service on major taxpayers in Ulianovsk Region
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: whether tax agent must pay at his own expense the amount of VAT, which he failed to withhold from a foreign taxpayer, given that the tax agent has already paid fine and penalties for this violation of tax legislation?
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 29 March 2012 № 16882/2011 in the case The company “Commercial bank “Moskovskii kapital” et al. vs The State unitary enterprise “The Second printery of Federal Directorate of Medico-bilogical and extremal problems”
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: under which circumstances execution may be levied against the property of the surety, if such surety is a federal unitary enterprise?
Subject areas:
Decree of the Plenary Session of the Supreme Commercial Court of 23 March 2012 № 14 “On Particular Issues of the Practice of Resolution of Disputes Connected with the Challenging of Bank Guarantees”
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
Subject areas:
Decree of the Plenary Session of the Supreme Commercial Court of 23 March 2012 № 12 “On Making Amendments to the Decree of the Plenary Session of the Supreme Commercial Court of the Russian Federation of 30 June 2011 № 52 “On the Application of Provisions of the Commercial Procedure Code of the Russian Federation in the Event of Reversal of Judicial Acts on the Grounds of New or Newly Discovered Circumstances”
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- The amendments affect the powers of the Plenary Session and Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court to develop the law which they exercise by way of working out ‘legal positions’ (interpretations) binding upon courts.
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 22 March 2012 № 12613/11 in the case Shavkat Satarov vs The company “Uralskii Priborostroitelnyi zavod” et al.
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: whether the corporate law concept of “affiliation” is applicable to natural persons who formally do not engage in entrepreneurial activities?
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 20 March 2012 № 14989/11 in the case The company “IunitPrestizh” vs The company “Uiut-Stroi” et al.
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: if in the course of judicial proceedings it has been found that the defendant behaved in an unscrupulous manner, in particular, if he refused to disclose the necessary information, whether the plaintiff should then prove the facts he stated to be true, or the burden of proving or, rather, refuting them should be shifted upon the defendant?
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 15 March 2012 № 16067/11 in the case Corporation “Aelita Software Corporation” (USA) vs The Interdistrict Inspection of Federal Tax Service № 47 for the City of Moscow
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: who must prove the reasonability of expenses incurred by the winning party for court representation when this party demands their reimbursement?
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 6 March 2012 № 12505/11 in the case The company “Doroga” vs G.P.Semenenko
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: what are the standards of reasonable and in good faith behaviour of the chief manager of the company and how the burden of proof should be distributed if the plaintiff (shareholder of the company) submits weighty arguments of the disputed transactions being interrelated and of the chief manager of the company being in the situation of a conflict of interests?
- Dissenting opinion:
- Dedov Dmitriy
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 28 February 2012 № 14850/11 in the case The company “Farn-Trade” vs The company “Prosto” et al.
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Points of law: 1) what are the requirements to the procedure of publication and dissemination of notifications concerning a public sale? 2) whether the consent of lessor is mandatory in case of the transfer of the right to lease of the state or municipal property?
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 28 February 2012 № 15935/11 in the case The bank “Zenit” vs Serghei Birkle, the bankruptcy trustee of the company “Tvins-Kaliningrad”
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: if a bankruptcy creditor submits to the bankruptcy trustee of the debtor company the evidence that a debtor company transaction is suspect, whether the bankruptcy trustee must challenge such transaction in court?
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 28 February 2012 № 12436/11 in the case The company “Konsortium-PIK” et al. vs The Federal Service for Intellectual Property, Patents and Trademarks
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: whether a designation which is confusingly similar to an international nonproprietary name may be registered as a trademark?
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 28 February 2012 № 14324/11 in the case The company “Volgograd-GSM” vs The Volzhsk City Department of Judicial Bailiffs
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
Subject areas:
Decision of the Supreme Commercial Court of 21 February 2012 № 14589/11
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: whether the Order of the Ministry of Culture of 25 August 2010 is lawful to the extent in which it places upon the commercial entities the duty to store a large number of various documents (enumerated in the Order) and prescribes periods for their storage?
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.