So, in the analyzed case No. 334/5077/19, the Ukrainian court considered the person’s petition for recognition and granting permission to execute the decision of the court of Tula, adopted in 2018, on the territory of our country. The sanction was required to collect funds from the defendant (international debt collection).
The Ukrainian court notified the defendant about the consideration of the said petition for compulsory execution on the territory of Ukraine of the decision of a foreign court. He was asked to submit his objections or refuse to provide them.
He told the court that the petition could not be satisfied, since the Russian court had violated the procedure for notifying him of the day, time and place of the hearing. The decision was made on the basis of false information about this.
“The defendant pointed to a violation by the Russian court of Art. 55th Minsk Convention “On Legal Assistance and …”, Art. 6th Convention “On the Protection of Human Rights …”, Articles 5, 10 and 15 of the Convention “On the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents …”, as well as paragraph 26 of the judgment of the European Court “Nadtochy vs Ukraine”.
He examined the above objections, allowing the defendant not to pay the plaintiff the debt and decided the following: “Refuse to satisfy the petition for recognition and granting permission for the execution of territory of Ukraine, the decision of the Tula court on the collection debts in favor claimant!”
Why did it happen? Because the court of the Russian Federation violated the procedure for notifying the defendant about the day, place and time of the court session.
Specifically, he sent him a court summons by regular postal (international) letter, and had to send it through the competent justice authorities with obligatory service.
It is impossible not to draw attention to the fact that this letter was the only one, and not one of many, as “sounded” in the decision of the Russian court.
The Ukrainian court argued for the decision by paragraph 2 of part 2 of Article 468 of the Code of Civil Procedure, allowing to refuse such requests if the party in respect of which it was accepted was deprived of the opportunity to participate in the trial due to failure to notify it about the consideration of the case.
This is exactly what happened in the analyzed case! The defendant, let’s say, either himself or with legal assistance (history is silent, but most likely with the latter), was able to legally avoid paying the bills by using the opponent’s mistakes against himself.
Even a solution to an economic dispute can become a breeding ground for threats! For example, the consideration of one of the cases, during which the plaintiff asked to explain to him certain clauses of the land plot lease agreement, ended with the tenant dissatisfied with the court decision not in his favor, took it […]
The reform of the legal profession has been delayed! According to the Ukrainian human rights community, the failure to adopt draft law No. 9055 “On the Bar and Lawyer Activities”, which should bring the activities of lawyers into line with the significantly changed procedural legislation, threatens the independence of the constitutional institution of the bar […]
The Ukrainian Supreme Court spoke about the obligation to pay legal costs in cases of compensation by persons who suffered material damage as a result of injury at work. By the decision in case No. 127/20705 / 16-c of 06/11/2019, the Supreme Court “freed” such persons from paying the court fee! Background of conclusion and […]
As practice shows, counterparties, when concluding international agreements (if lawyers are not involved in the development of agreements), practically do not attach importance to the jurisdiction of dispute resolution. Obviously in vain! The information will be interesting and useful to foreign creditors who have debtors from Ukraine, Belarus and Russia. IN MOST CASES! Such “inattention” […]
Disputed land under the construction is a potential litigation with all the ensuing consequences. The Supreme Court of Ukraine considered one of such disputes and published a legal opinion, which determines that the granting of permission for the development of a land management project regarding the allotment of a “non-free” land plot does not give […]
The Cabinet of Ministers “rewrote” and laconized labor legislation! Instead of the Soviet Labor Code, containing 265 articles, the CMU proposes to introduce a modernized Labor Law, consisting of 98 articles. The corresponding project was registered in the Parliament under № 2708. Analyzing! “New rules… Forbidding! Bias and mobbing in the work environment, psychological and […]
Entrust the settlement of legal disputes to the SPEAKER team of professionals! Get the highest level of legal services.
We are ready to start discussing your task. We will contact you shortly.Back