Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 2 October 2012 № 6040/12 in the case The company “Vítkovice Power Engineering” vs BinBank
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: whether guarantor (a bank) may refuse paying to the beneficiary under bank guarantee with reference to the fact that the principal failed to perform his contractual duty of returning advance payments to the beneficiary due to reasons which evolved without principal’s fault.
Subject areas:
Decision of the Supreme Commercial Court of 1 October 2012 № ВАС-6474/12 upon the application of Jan Topol, a citizen of Czech Republic
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: the legality of prohibition imposed by Rospatent upon appointing advocates as representatives of non-residents (both natural and legal persons) in patent disputes, whereas residents are permitted to hire advocates as well as patent attorneys.
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of Supreme Commercial Court of 25 September 2012 6616/12 in the case The company “FinansEkspert” vs The company “Energotehmash”
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: if a preliminary contract of lease of a piece of real estate had been concluded prior to the conclusion of a mortgage contract as to the same real estate, whether the real estate in question remains encumbered by lease in case of bankruptcy of the pledgor (lessor), and whether it is possible to judicially compel the pledgeholder to conclude contract of lease?
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of Supreme Commercial Court of 25 September 2012 № 5944/12 in the case The Deputy Military Prosecutor of the Western Military Circuit et al. vs The Moscow Regional Directorate of the Federal Agency for the Management of State Property et al.
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: whether restitution of a land plot as a consequence of invalidity of a purchase-sale contract is admissible, if after the conclusion of the contract the right of common share ownership to the land plot has been gained by owners of an apartment house built on this site?
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of Supreme Commercial Court of 18 September 2012 № 5338/12 in the case The company “Spektr” vs The Bath and Laundry Enterprise “Chaika” et al.
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: whether it is possible to recover interest for the use of another’s means (Art 395, Civil Code), if the party which lost the case, has failed to reimburse timely the litigation expenses to the winner?
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of Supreme Commercial Court of 11 September 2012 № 5939/12 in the case The company “Hame s.r.o” (Czech Republic) vs The company “Ruzkom” et al.
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: whether a factory violates an exclusive right to another’s trademark, when it packages its own goods with the packing, on which a designation, confusingly similar to this trade mark, has been put not by the factory itself, but by a third person (the supplier of the packing)?
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of Supreme Commercial Court of 17 July 2012 № 17528/11 in the case The company “Les” vs The Federal Customs Service of the Russian Federation
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: whether it is possible to recover a contributory compensation of moral harm (i.e., harm to company’s reputation) from a State body which adopted an unlawful decision against the company?
Subject areas:
Decree of the Plenary Session of the Supreme Commercial Court of 12 July 2012 N 42 “On Certain Questions Regarding the Resolution of Disputes Connected to Suretyship”
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- In this explanatory Judgment the Court has elucidated an array of issues concerning suretyships.
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of Supreme Commercial Court of 10 July 2012 № 17713/11 in the case The company “The Silver of Maghadan” vs The Interdistrict Tax Inspection № 1 for Maghadan Region
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: is it lawful to have in an export contract, under which silver is sold abroad, a clause establishing a “price corridor” in the form of admissible deviations from the price of the silver in the world market?
Subject areas:
Ruling of the Constitutional Court of 28 June 2012 № 1252-О on the refusal to accept for consideration the complaint of the Open Joint-Stock Company “Fabrika Proizvodstva Platkov” against the violation of constitutional rights and freedoms by Articles 337 and paragraph 1 of Article 352 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, and also paragraph 1 of Article 50 of the Federal law “On Mortgage (Pledge of Immovables)”
- Court:
- Constitutional Court
- Legal issue: whether the contested provisions are constitutional, if – according to an interpretation given by courts, in particular by the Plenary Session of the Supreme Arbitrazh (Commercial) Court in its Decree of 17 February 2011 № 10 “On Certain Questions of the Application of Legislation on Pledge” - they do not permit the termination of the pledge in the event of such a change of the obligation secured thereby, which entails the increase of liability of the pledgor and the risk of his losing the pledged property.
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Constitutional Court of 27 June 2012 № 15-П on the review of constitutionality of paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 29, paragraph 2 of Article 31 and Article 32 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation in connection with the complaint of the citizen I.B.Delova
- Court:
- Constitutional Court
- Legal issue: whether the contested provisions are constitutional, since they do not imply the possibility of such restriction of person's dispositive legal capacity which is necessary for the protection of his rights because of mental disturbance and would be commensurate to his degree of ability to understand the significance of his actions and manage them, and thus deprive such citizen of the right to perform legally significant actions, including the disposal of a pension in order to satisfy his everyday needs.
- Dissenting opinion:
- Zhilin Gennadiy
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 26 June 2012 № 17769/11 in the case The Baltic Customs Office vs The company “Optimum-Kargo”
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: whether it constitutes an unlawful use of the trademark on the part of an importer to place a designation which is confusingly similar to the trademark upon shipment-related documentation (such as invoice, packing list and compliance certificate)?
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 21 June 2012 № 3352/12 in the case The company “KIT Finans Investment bank” vs The company “Formula pereezda”
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: whether the impossibility to stop spreading of fire caused by short-circuit may qualify as an insuperable force (an Act of God or major force)?
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 7 June 2012 № 16513/11 in the case Rosselkhozbank (as represented by its Maghadan regional branch) vs The company “Alisa” et al.
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 5 June 2012 № 76/12 in the case The company “Financial and Industrial Union Sibkonkord” vs The Holding company “Sibirskii Cement” et al.
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: under which conditions a transaction concluded by a joint-stock company in violation of a law may be deemed to be invalid upon the suit of a shareholder as being against his rights and lawful interests?
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.