Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 22 May 2012 № 17395/11 in the case The Ulianovsk regional union of consumer societies vs The Ulianovsk regional branch of the Federal Service for State Registration, Cadastre and Cartography
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: whether the Federal law “On Participation in Shared Construction of Apartment Houses and Other Objects of Real Estate” covers the cases in which not a construction of an apartment house, but a reconstruction of an existent building takes place?
Subject areas:
Information Letter of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 22 May 2012 № 150 “The Review of the Practice of Consideration by Commercial Courts of the Disputes Connected with the Dismissal of Bankruptcy Trustees”
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- In this Information Letter the Presidium gave to courts a number of recommendations. It appears that they mainly aim at curbing an unduly narrow and formal approach shown by courts when resolving disputes related to the dismissal of bankruptcy trustees.
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 22 May 2012 № 13443/11 in the case The company “MIG Story” vs The city of Kaliningrad
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: whether the demand of a person to recover the losses (expenses) is lawful, if they were borne as a result of his fulfilment of a decision of a public authority which was adopted following the request of the same person, but was knowingly not conforming to a law?
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Constitutional Court of 18 May 2012 № 12-П on the review of constitutionality of provisions of part 2 of Article 20.2 of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses, paragraph 3 of part 4 of Article 5 and paragraph 5 of part 3 of Article 7 of the Federal law “On Assemblies, Meetings, Demonstrations, Manifestations, and Picketing” in connection with the complaint of the citizen S.A.Katkov
- Court:
- Constitutional Court
- Legal issue: whether the contested provisions are constitutional, since they allow bringing the organiser of public action to administrative responsibility, if the actual number of participants of the given public action has exceeded the one declared in the notice on its holding.
- Dissenting opinion:
- Yaroslavtsev Vladimir
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Constitutional Court of 14 May 2012 № 11-П on the review of constitutionality of a provision of passage 2 of part 1 of Article 446 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation in connection with complaints of citizens F.Kh.Gumerova and A.Iu.Shikunova
- Court:
- Constitutional Court
- Legal issue: whether the provision in question is constitutional, given that it does not allow (excepting the case of a mortgage) to levy execution on a dwelling apartment owned by the debtor, when such apartment is the sole place suitable for the permanent residence of the debtor and the members of his family?
- Dissenting opinion:
- Bondar Nikolay , Zhilin Gennadiy
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 24 April 2012 № 16404/11 in the case The company “Olimpia” vs The company “Parex banka” et al.
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Points of law: 1) whether the actual presence in the territory of the Russian Federation of a representative office of a foreign legal entity constitutes, under the Agreement between the Republic of Latvia and the Russian Federation on Legal Assistance and Legal Relations in Civil, Family and Criminal Matters (1993), a sufficient ground for assuming jurisdiction by a Russian commercial court with regard to a dispute involving the aforementioned foreign legal entity, or it is only the formal presence of a properly registered representative office that may constitute the necessary precondition for such assuming of jurisdiction?; or 2) whether it is essential, for the purposes of determining the jurisdiction (proper venue), that the Russian branches of the foreign legal entity did not take part in assisting the disputed transactions?
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Constitutional Court of 23 April 2012 № 10-П on the review of constitutionality of the tenth passage of Article 2 of the Law of the Russian Federation "On the Employment of the Population in the Russian Federation" in connection with the complaint of the citizen E.N.Erlich
- Court:
- Constitutional Court
- Legal issue: whether the contested rules are constitutional, as far as they do not allow the recognition of a founder of an association of house-owners as an unemployed person, whereas the founders (or members) of other non-commercial organisations may under the same law be recognised as being unemployed, which gives then the right to unemployment benefits.
Subject areas:
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 Constitutional Court of 30 March 2012 № 9-П on the review of constitutionality of part 2 of Article 4 of the Law of the Russian Federation “On Privatisation of Housing Fund in the Russian Federation” in connection with the complaint of administration of the municipal formation “Zvenigovskii municipal district” of Marii El Republic
- Court:
- Constitutional Court
- Legal issue: whether the contested provision, in violation of constitutional principles of equality and rule of law as well as constitutional prohibition against restrictions of rights of local self-government as to independent management of municipal property, does not allow the bodies of local self-government to adopt decisions in the form of a normative act concerning the privatisation of employment-related apartments in the absence of a special regional normative act to that effect.
- Dissenting opinion:
- Zhilin Gennadiy , Kazantsev Sergey
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:
Judgment of the Constitutional Court of 27 March 2012 № 8-П on the review of constitutionality of paragraph 1 of Article 23 of the Federal law “On the International Treaties of the Russian Federation” in connection with the complaint of citizen I.D.Ushakov
- Court:
- Constitutional Court
- Legal issue: whether an international treaty of the Russian Federation (or a part thereof) which affects the rights, freedoms and duties of man and the citizen and at the same time establishes the rules, other than those envisaged by a law, may apply temporarily, provided that such a treaty was not officially published?
- Dissenting opinion:
- Zhilin Gennadiy , Gadzhiev Gadis
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Constitutional Court of the Constitutional Court 27 March 2012 № 7-П on the review of constitutionality of provisions of part 2 of Art 29 of the Law of the Russian Federation “On Militia” and paragraph 1 of part 3 of Article 43 of the Federal law "On Police" in connection with the request of Zhelezhodorozhyi district court of Penza City
- Court:
- Constitutional Court
- Legal issue: whether the contested provisions are constitutional as long as they establish a lower, as compared with general rules of the civil law, amount of compensation of harm caused to the family members and dependents of a member of staff of militia (or police) by the death of bread-winner resulting from a severe injury or another damage to health connected to his discharge of official duties.
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:
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.