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:
Judgment of the Plenary Session of the Supreme Commercial Court of 25 January 2013 № 13 “On making additions to the Judgment of the Supreme Commercial Court of the Russian Federation of 17 November 2011 № 73 “On certain questions of the practice of applying the rules of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation to lease contracts”
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
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 № 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 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 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 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 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:
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 № 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:
Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 13 November 2012 № 9007/12 in the case The company SABMiller RUS vs The company “Aleksandrit” et al.
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: whether a dispute arising out of a lease contract which was secured by suretyship of a natural person, not having the status of individual entrepreneur, may fall nonetheless within the jurisdiction of commercial courts?
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 13 November 2012 № 7454/12 in the case Citizen Komissarov vs The company “A family itelmen commune Haiko” et al.
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: the legality of a potestative condition precedent in a contract of sale of a share in a limited liability company, according to which in case of the purchaser’s failure to timely pay a full price for the share the contract shall be repudiated and corresponding obligations shall terminate.
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 6 November 2012 № 9127/12 in the case Timofeev, the bankruptcy trustee of the company “Trading house Vega” vs M.Suturin, the acting director of the company “Trading house Vega”
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: whether fault of general director of a company is a necessary precondition for holding him subsidiarily liable for the debts of the company, as envisaged by the Bankruptcy Law in case of his failure to convey the accounting documentation to the bankruptcy trustee?
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 23 October 2012 № 7508/12 in the case Citizen Ivanov et al. vs The company “Sibtechgaz”
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: the possibility to provide in company’s internal regulations for additional requirements to candidate directors (members of the board).
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Plenary Session of the Supreme Commercial Court № 59 and Judgment of the Plenary Session of the Supreme Commercial Court № 60 of 8 October 2012
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Both judgments elucidate the issues connected to the creation of the Court for Intellectual Property Rights within the system of commercial 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.