Decree of the Plenary Session of the Supreme Court of 27 June 2013 № 20 “On the Application by Courts of Legislation on Voluntary Insurance of Property of Citizens”
- Court:
- Supreme Court
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Constitutional Court of 17 June 2013 № 13-П on the review of constitutionality of part 2 of Article 2 of the Federal law of 23 December 2010 № 360-ФЗ “On Making Changes in the Federal Law “On the Additional Social Security of the Members of the Flying Crews of Civil Aviation Aircrafts” in connection with the requests from commercial courts of Sakhalin Region and Primorskiy Krai
- Court:
- Constitutional Court
- The constitutionality of the disputed rule, as long as the change introduced by it (namely, the removal of a limit on the amount of payments and remunerations on the basis of which the contributions for an addition to aviators’ pensions were calculated and exacted) was given retroactive force.
Subject areas:
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.
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- 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?
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Constitutional Court of 23 May 2013 № 11-П on the review of constitutionality of paragraph 1 of Article 333.40 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation in connection with the complaint of the limited liability company “Vstrecha”
- Court:
- Constitutional Court
- The constitutionality of the rule, which precludes the reimbursement of the amount of dues paid for the license for retail sales of spirits, when the license has been denied
- Dissenting opinion:
- Gadzhiev Gadis
Subject areas:
Review of court practice on civil cases related to the settlement of disputes on the performance of credit obligations (as affirmed by the Presidium of the Supreme Court on 22 May 2013)
- Court:
- Supreme Court
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 2 April 2013 № 11980/12 in the case Ru-Center vs Federal Antitrust Service
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- 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?
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Constitutional Court of 5 March 2013 № 5-П on the review of constitutionality of Article 16 of the Federal law “On the Protection of Environment” and the Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation “On Approval of the Procedure for Determination of Pay and its Maximum Amounts for Pollution of Natural Environment, Disposal of Waste, Other Kinds of Harmful Affects” in connection with the complaint of limited liability company “Topol”
- Court:
- Constitutional Court
- Legal issue: the constitutionality of the public law payment in the form of pay for the placement of waste, given that the legislation does not determine who bears the duty to pay it – either the person generating the waste or a specialized organization which carries out its removal and burial - thus delegating the issue to courts’ discretion?
- Dissenting opinion:
- Aranovskiy Konstantin
Subject areas:
Review on particular issues of court practice related to voluntary insurance of the property of citizens (as affirmed by the Presidium of the Supreme Court on 30 January 2013)
- Court:
- Supreme Court
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Constitutional Court of 30 January 2013 № 2-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 the version of the Federal Law of 17 July 1999 № 175-ФЗ in connection with the complaint of the citizen K.V.Chumakin
- Court:
- Constitutional Court
- Legal issue: the constitutionality of the aforementioned provision as long as it does not allow members of a “housing saving cooperative” (building society) to be registered as unemployed.
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Plenary Session of the Supreme Commercial Court of 25 January 2013 № 11 “On the Payment of Value Added Tax at the Sale of Property of a Debtor Held to be Bankrupt”
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
Subject areas:
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:
Judgment of the Constitutional Court of 17 January 2013 № 1-П on the review of constitutionality of provisions of part 5 of Article 19.8 of the Code of Administrative Offences in connection with the complaint of the LLC “Maslianky Khebopriemtyi Punkt”
- Court:
- Constitutional Court
- Legal issue: the constitutionality of the norm establishing for legal entities a minimal fine of 300,000 RUR for the failure to submit information upon the request of antitrust authorities.
- Dissenting opinion:
- Kokotov Aleksandr
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Constitutional Court of 25 December 2012 № 33-П on the review of constitutionality of the provisions of Article 213.1 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation in connection with the complaint of V.N.Kononov
- Court:
- Constitutional Court
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 Constitutional Court of 26 November 2012 № 28-П on the review of constitutionality of Section 1 of Article 16.2 and Section 2 of Article 27.11 of the Administrative Offences Code of the Russian Federation in connection with the complaint of the Limited Liability Company “Avesta”
- Court:
- Constitutional Court
- Legal issue: whether the constitutional rights of the applicant (a legal entity) were violated by the rules of legislation, which make the amount of fine for the failure to declare a commodity at customs dependent upon such insufficiently clear notion as market value of this commodity in the Russian Federation?
- Dissenting opinion:
- Knyazev Sergey , Melnikov Nikolay , Aranovskiy Konstantin
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.