1 January 2015
In 2014, Law Firm KONUS considerably developed its activities due to the move to a new modern office in the center of Yekaterinburg and the expansion of the practice of rendering services in the fields of construction and property protection.
Lawyers of the company participated in 310 court sessions in the Sverdlovsk, Tyumen, Omsk Regions, Moscow, Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous District.
We defended the interests of clients in courts on a number of cases related to the construction. The Arbitration Court of the Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous District considered several disputes concerning the execution of contracts for the performance of works on reclamation of oil fields. In several cases, payment for works performed under construction contracts, including in the absence of signed work completion certificates, was collected. Amounts owing were collected from the customers in favor of our clients, while in one case, an action of the producer company against the contractor for recovery of a penalty for breach of the contract was dismissed.
In September 2014, while acting for the benefit of the interest-holders, we proved in court the legality of the refusal to extend the building permit to an unscrupulous developer. The Arbitration Court delivered a judgment stating that it is necessary to refuse to extend the building permit of the developer of one of the most famous long-delayed construction sites in Yekaterinburg.
Out-of-court work with clients in the field of construction was actively developing. In favor of the prime contractors we provided legal support for the construction of a rolling plant mill of the metallurgical plant in the Sverdlovsk Region and the construction of the exhibition center in the city of Yekaterinburg.
We continue the practice of client representation in the double selling of real estate. The case was completed in the arbitration court, following the results of which the plaintiff’s action against our client concerning the invalidation of the contract of non-residential premises purchase was dismissed. The action was filed on the grounds that the same space premises have been previously sold to another person. In another case, the court satisfied the requirements of our client and declared that the second applicant in the double selling didn’t have ownership of the non-residential premises.
An interesting dispute also ended with the victory of our client. One of the company members challenged the contract for the amount of about 100 million rubles on the grounds that it was a related party transaction and a major transaction made without his permission, and demanded repayment of the transferred money. In court, we managed to refute these arguments and to convince the court of the lawfulness of this contract conclusion.
After several years of disputes, we have forced the owners of the quarry to clear the way to an adjacent site. The defendant being the owner of the mining quarry intentionally obstructed the only access road to the plaintiff’s land plot with riddling and small rocks. The court ordered the defendant to clear the access road and to allow passage, and in the case of failure to execute the judgment, it would bear the costs of attraction of third-party equipment.
The court case concerning the reduction of the cadastral value of the land plot by 1.5 thousand times – from 700 million to 500 thousand rubles also ended in victory.
One of the nicest in 2014 was the victory in the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation with regard to the case of reclamation of property in favor of the Russian Federation, in consequence of which all of the previously passed judiciary acts against our clients were canceled, and the case was remanded for retrial. Return to news list