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 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 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 Constitutional Court of 1 March 2012 № 6-П on the review of constitutionality of a provision of passage 2 of subparagraph 2 of paragraph 1 of Article 220 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation in connection with the complaint of the Attorney for Human Rights in the Russian Federation
- Court:
- Constitutional Court
- Legal issue: the constitutionality of the contested provision, as interpreted by the current court practice, which refuses to grant tax deduction for the purposes of personal income tax to a parent who has incurred expenses for acquiring for his non-adult child the ownership to a dwelling (an apartment) situated in the territory of the Russian Federation.
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 14 February 2012 № 12416/11 in the case The company “Mobile TeleSystems” vs The Krasnoyarsk Region Directorate of the Federal Service for the Protection of Consumers and Human Well-Being
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: the legality of a provision in the contract between the mobile service company and the customer (subscriber) which allows the former to recover the indebtedness of the latter by withdrawing money from another account of the same customer created under a different (analogous) contract between him and the company.
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 7 February 2012 № 11637/11 in the case The company “Leroy Merlin Vostok” vs The Interdistrict tax inspection № 9 of the Moscow Region
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: whether marketing (incentive) bonuses for the volume of sales and for the presence of a commodity in shops payable by suppliers to retail sellers (retail chains) constitute a payment for services and as such ought to be included into sellers’ tax base for the purposes of VAT, or those bonuses are merely a way of price determination and therefore must not be included into tax base?
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 17 January 2012 № 9898/11 in the case The company “RusPromLeasing” vs The Tax Inspection № 4 for the City of Moscow
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: whether thin capitalisation rules in Art 269 of the Tax Code require that the comparability of conditions in a loan contract concluded by the taxpayer as a borrower should be determined exclusively by comparing them with the provisions of other loan contracts of the same taxpayer or, rather, the conditions existent in the entire credit market should be taken into account?
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 17 January 2012 № 11292/11 in the case The Company "RLP-Yarmarka" vs The company "Aternum"
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 17 January 2012 № 11292/11 in the case The Company “RLP-Yarmarka” vs The company “Aternum”
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 1 December 2011 № 9987/11 in the case Administration of Cheliabinsk City et al. vs The Federal Agency for the Management of State Property et al.
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: whether the land plots constituting a federal property may be compulsorily withdrawn for the needs of a municipality?
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 22 November 2011 № 9113/11 in the case The Federal treasury enterprise “Samara factory ‘Kommunar’” vs “The interregional distribution grid company of Volga”
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: whether the coercion to conclude a contract on the transmission of electricity between allied grid companies is lawful, provided that in the proposed draft of the contract the plaintiff appears only as a contractor (the one who renders services) whereas the defendant (the company which is being compelled to the conclusion of the contract) appears only as a customer (the consumer of services)?
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Court of 15 November 2011 N 8654/11 in the case Coal company “Severnyi Kuzbass” vs The Federal Inspection № 1 for Major Taxpayers of Kemerovo Region
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: what is the role of international treaties with regard to interest payments from Russian companies to foreign residents – whether they regulate the composition of expenses deductible at the taxation of the profit of Russian companies, or such composition must be determined in accordance with the rules of the Russian Tax Code?
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.