News

ABY s client under the case was the leading business Media of the southern region. The Media published a critical article about the corporation s activities and their impact on the local economy.

ABY provided the following legal position: the disputable article did not contain the author opinion, since it included data from the Round Table of officials and leading agricultural enterprises. Therefore, the Media is exempt from responsibility for disseminating information from official speeches by virtue of the law.

We illustrated to the court that the article s data was not a subject of judicial protection as, substantially and semantically, it was the renditions of the Round Table s official speeches. The said speeches reflected participants subjective opinions on specific events and prospects for local development. The speeches corresponded to reality, and there was no mentioning on the professional qualities of the plaintiffs and their business reputation.

Moreover, ABY pointed out that the limitation period on requirements for the Media s publications has expired.

The case has been under consideration for 2.5 years. The results of the forensic linguistic examination confirmed that the article contained negative information.

However, on 17 November 2022, the Kushchevsky District Court decided to dismiss the defamation claim against ABY s client.

Associate Alexey Demekhin represented the interests of the client.

According to the privatisation plan, the new owner got the production complex that used to be a part of the former state enterprise. However, some objects involved in the technological process and located on the enterprises territory remained in state ownership by mistake.

For more than 20 years, the client has unsuccessfully tried to redeem the property as a matter of priority. But in 2022, the territorial authority Federal Agency for State Property Management (Rosimushchestvo) refused the client again.

The court of the first instance made a decision in favour of Rosimushchestvo since the judge saw no grounds to apply the norm on the exclusive rules for privatisation without bidding, which became invalid in 2015.

We managed to convince the court of appeal that the client failed to implement the privatisation plan due to the misfeasance of the state authority. We proved that there were no regulatory and factual obstacles for the client to privatise the property. The facilities subject to privatisation remained, initially and continuously, in ownership and usage of the client. No third party can privatise them. The facilities did not change their purposes or lose their connections to the property complex owned by the client. Thus, the client retained their primary right to acquire the disputed property.

Therefore, the 15th Commercial Appeal Court decided to satisfy the clients claim.

Managing Partner Yuri Pustovit and associate Alexey Demekhin represented the clients interests.

On this day, the gathered participants looked especially grand in tuxedos and cocktail dresses because the event became something more than an award ceremony. It is a cultural and secular event for those who have reached a certain level in their career. Actors, singers, writers, and celebrities give awards to the winners of each nomination.

Despite all the challenges, 471 law companies placed in the 2022 ranking. This year Pravo.ru established two new nominations: "Anti-crisis Business Support" and "Anti-crisis Customer Support".

This year Pravo.ru divided nominations into legal practices and industries and added two new sections - "Agro-Industrial Complex and Agriculture" and "Retail, FMCG, Catering" were added. This time the "bankruptcy" was divided into two sections: "Restructuring" and "Consulting and Litigation" (high-market and mid-market). "Arbitration proceedings" were divided into two blocks: "Commercial disputes" (high-market and mid-market) and "Corporate disputes".

According to practices in the regional ranking, Advocates Burea Yug got awards in two nominations:

arbitration disputes - 1 Band (high-market) ;

dispute resolution in courts of general jurisdiction - 1 Band.

ABY also took 3rdplace among leading law firms in the regional revenue ranking.

To get more information and see a photo report of the ceremony, go to Pravo-300 s website

The Head of the Krasnodar region Administration (Governor) awarded the Letter of Gratitude to Yuri Pustovit, Managing partner of Advocates Bureau Yug, for being conscientious at work, an active participant and contributer in improving investment climate and development of Krasnodar Region for many years.

We filed an administrative lawsuit against the Regional Tariff Service in the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kalmykia. We requested the Court to recognize the authoritys decision to establish the required gross revenue and tariff as invalid. We provided reasons in the lawsuit that the client had taken bank loans to eliminate cash gaps and spent them on the companys branch in the Republic of Kalmykia. We proved that certain regulatory acts in the electric power industry provide legal grounds to accept the costs.

The Supreme Court of the Republic of Kalmykia (Decision dd. 20.12.2021) and the Judicial Board for Administrative Cases of the Third Appeal Court of General Jurisdiction (Appellate Ruling dd. 05.04.2022) refused to include loan interest in the clients tariff. Our lawyers had to file a cassation complaint.

The Fourth Cassation Court of General Jurisdiction ruled to change the previous judicial decisions. It eliminated the conclusion from their motivational parts stating that the planned costs for 2021 of 131,328,870 rubles were economically unreasonable and not proved by documents under the article "On Loan Interests (Loan Expenses)". It also dismissed adjustments to uncontrolled expenses of 563,936,270 rubles based on the actual values for the year 2019 under the Article "On Loan Interest (Loan Expenses)".

Managing Partner Yuri Pustovit, Senior associate Sergey Radchenko and Associate Zakhar Khrebtov represented the clients interests in the Fourth Cassation Court of General Jurisdiction.

The welcoming party took place at sunset in Sochi Grand Marina near seaport. All guests could either enjoy live music and magnificent views or participate in intellectual game “What?Where?When?” with legendary Alexander Drouz as a host.

The official program of the forum was rich and relevant to current events in the business world: sanctions restrictions, judicial practice, bankruptcy and subsidiary liability, legal risks of businesses and criminal liability of their owners.

The official part started with a business breakfast moderated by Yuri Pustovit, Managing partner of Advocates Bureau Yug, who suggested to discuss business problems during sanctions. Everyone at the breakfast shared their ways to protect assets during the sanctions period, learned about the legal risks of parallel imports, summarized current customs and criminal risks for businesses, as well opportunity of citizenship through investment: government programs in other countries that are still open to Russian residents.

The 1st session “Main judicial events 2022” covered a wide range of legal practices. All participants discussed opportunities and trends in asset management of foreign companies; new trends in judicial practice during

sanctions; problems and prospects of class suits against foreign companies that have left Russia; risks, preferences and prospects related to taxes in business; current IP litigations: trademarks, challenging decisions of Rospatent and the Federal Antimonopoly Service of Russia.

ABY’s Senior associate Sergey Radchenko spoke about the current judicial practice of the Supreme Court on damage recoveries.

The bankruptcy topic is so wide in new realities that the second session was completely devoted to it. Practicing lawyers shared their opinions on trends in requirement subordination in bankruptcy, gave practical advice on mediation in bankruptcy, talked about current cases on challenging transactions on bankruptcy grounds, advised to monitor activities of liquidators, to protect market conditions for services rendered in criminal prosecution and bankruptcy disputes. They also found out what should be done when foreclosing on the only housing of the debtor during bankruptcy, as stated by the Supreme and the Constitutional Courts of the Russian Federation.

During the 3rd session “Business responsibility: administrative, subsidiary and criminal” speakers considered trends in judicial practice, cases of subsidiary liability outside bankruptcy, liability insurance of directors and officials. They also shared how to save management from a criminal case by creating a prejudice if you lose arbitration dispute, in accordance with Article 159 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. They disclosed ins and outs of responsibility for off-the-meter electricity consumption and how to protect a client in case of tax crimes.

The final 4th session “The future of legal business and new challenges in working with clients” was held in the aquarium format that allows speakers to discuss both “controversial” topics by involving different parties and their possible solutions. Among the speakers were Yuri Pustovit (Managing Partner of Advocates Bureau Yug), Oleg Grishunin (Director of Legal and Corporate Affairs at BEL Development), Elena Krupskaya (Director of Legal Affairs at X5), etc. Speakers and participants united in an effort to find solutions to controversial issues, using recommendations from in-houses experts and consultants, to predict which industries, practices and directions will be in demand in 2022-2023, to build eco-friendly communications in a professional environment in 2022 realities. The final topic involved law firm management, peculiarities of pricing in the legal market in current economic situation and attempts to find something new in the legal team management to inspire employees to new achievements.

One who works well deserves to rest well, especially when the former involves outdoor activities. Thus, the Legal Forum of the Southern Russia chose the traditional sailing regatta to close official program in 2022. Bright sun, salty sea and speed competition create right mood for future work. The forum ended with award ceremony of the regatta’s winners and promises to welcome its guests next year.

The applicant insisted that both parties aimed at withdrawing assets while there were signs of the debtors insolvency.

A mandatory condition to recognize a suspicious transaction as invalid one, in accordance with clause 2, Article 61.2 of the Bankruptcy Law, is the inflicted damage to the property rights of creditors. When establishing this circumstance, one must determine that a purpose to cause harm exists, and that the counterparty was aware of this purpose.

During consideration of the case, we were able to prove that the transactions had been made by the debtor in order to fulfill real contractual legal relations, which had been confirmed by the parties, and that at the time of the transfer the recipient was not aware and could not be aware that the debtor had unfulfilled obligations to third parties.

Thus, on September 12, 2022, the Krasnodar Region Commercial Court decided to dismiss the applicants claims.

The clients interest were represented by ABYs lawyer Alexey Demekhin.

The client was involved in the court proceedings as a third party from the side of the management board. According to the clients shareholder, the losses amounted to approximately 2.5 billion. However, for 3 years, the shareholder has been failing to prove any evidence of negative consequences to the client caused by the actions management board and contractors management, including through the conclusion and execution of the disputed transactions. By his actions, the shareholder put the client in a risky position. In the absence of the sole executive body the shareholders demand may lead to significant risks for the client with losing the management board, reputation and the important counterparty, issues settlement related to additional tax base, and may also lead to the clients involvement in an endless litigation, causing financial and economic condition of the client to be questioned, and the suspension of activity.

The Commercial Court of Bashkortostan agreed with our arguments and declined the shareholder’s lawsuit.

ABYs associate Ekaterina Fedenko represented the clients interests.

The competitions were held according to the Swiss system in 6 rounds with a time control of 10 minutes, plus 5 seconds for each move made. 13 lawyers took part in the Championship. Svetlana Mustafina became the winner and scored 5.5 points in 6 games. The second place was taken by Sergey Radchenko, and the and third place — by Alexey Takhovsky, respectively.

Championship had warm and friendly atmosphere. All participants got merit certificates, prize–winners — medals, and the main winner — the Cup. According to Svetlana Vladimirovna Vasilyeva, President of the Krasnodar Region Bar Association, such events help to distract lawyers from their daily work and keep their “brains in good shape” at the same time. The Bar Association will continue to hold similar events, which are aimed primarily at colleagues rallying on each other within the law community.

To identify regional leaders, an analytical group of Pravo.ru examined more than 8 thousand decisions of Russian commercial courts adopted in 2021. To divide companies into bands, Pravo.ru took into account such indicators as: total value of the claim, number of cases in the proceedings, number of decisions in the final instances in 2021, result in the court trials, average value of the claim. Each indicator was considered alongside with its defining nuances.

We have to admit that political and economic changes in our country and the unprecedented number of sanctions have greatly affected disputes considered by the courts. Over the next few years we may predict an increasing number of disputes with foreign companies due to their withdrawal from Russian. Against this background, new disputes that used to be rare appear, such as, lawsuits on obligation to fulfill a contract, consumers’ class actions, lawsuits related to discussion on presumptive protection of companies’ rights from unfriendly jurisdictions. The number of corporate cases will increase due to foreign companies transferring their assets to Russian owners, the market redistribution and raider seizures.

You can get more information on forecasts in litigation area in the article by following the : link

In order to make the customer fulfill the contract, we filed a lawsuit on recovery of penalty for the delay in the performance of their obligations into the Krasnodar Region Commercial Court. We justified as follows: financing of the project was not terminated, the contract is still valid, which means the customer must execute it, as the customer fails to prove absence of their guilt in breaching the contract. Moreover, we have justified that the penalty was economically reasonable and accurately accrued with 20% VAT. We also justified that it was possible to accrue the penalty for entire price of the contract without the previously paid advance payment. While objecting to the arguments of the customer, we also justified that the case was under jurisdiction of the Krasnodar Region Commercial Court.

Upon considering the case, on June 6th, 2022, the Krasnodar Region Commercial Court satisfied the clients lawsuit and recovered 311 766 484 RUB from the customer for less than three months.

ABYs Managing partner Yuri Pustovit and Senior associate Sergey Radchenko represented the clients in the court of first instance.

Following the spring romantic mood, it was decided to start the event with a trip to the winery through a beautiful park. The buffet provided the guests with several varieties of local wine, letting them appreciate the youngest agricultural branch in Russia.

The official program named "Cross-Border Legal Issues" was influenced by an unexpected and abrupt upheaval of the global economy, which now creates unprecedented challenges for Russian and international companies.

The Forum was divided into three themed sessions on significant changes in business practices.

The first session was organized as a discussion of "Legal Instruments for Business in Foreign Jurisdictions". It was moderated by Anton Konnov, a partner and head of the CIS/Russia practice in Allen & Overy. The participants were able to discuss the following topics:

- Legal Framework for Cooperating in the CIS Countries: Business Opportunities;

- Transition to a New Level of Integration: Harmonization of Law in the CIS Countries;

- Dialogue Between International and National Courts: Influence of International Judicial Bodies on Each Others Practice.

During the second session “Support of Global Projects in the Age of Sanctions and Restrictions” moderated by Anton Avazhansky, Managing Director of “Alvarez & Marsal”, the guests discussed

- Legal Framework for Cooperating in the CIS Countries: Business Opportunities;

- Current Issues of Russian Anti-Sanction Legislation;

- Roadmap to Asset Tracing and Cross-Border Investigations;

- Migration Structure: Business, Taxes and Personal Assets During Turbulent Periods;

- Citizenship by Investment Trends: Government Programs in other Countries.

Yuri Pustovit, Managing Partner of the Advocates Bureau Yug, spoke at the third session “Litigation and Acute Issues in 2022”. The topic of the speech was “Revision of the contract provisions. Is it possible to terminate the contract, refuse delivery, change the terms due to changes in economic and political realities?”

Yuri Pustovit highlighted the following issues: how do the "special military operation" and sanctions affect contracts execution, whether they can be considered, firstly, as grounds to be exempt from liability on breaching the contract, secondly, as grounds to terminate a contract as it is impossible to perform it, and thirdly, as significant circumstances giving a party the right to demand a contract to be terminated or changed?

Other discussion topics at the third session were as follows:

- Sanction Disputes: Forecast for 2022-2023;

- The Effect of Decisions on Imposing Sanctions on Possible Performance of a Contract in Accordance with English law;

- New Difficulties in Implementing International Legal Orders of Courts and Law Enforcement Agencies, Execution of Court Decisions;

- Subsidiary Liability of Foreign Investors that Russian Companies Go Bankrupt: Risks, Opportunities and Consequences.

An outside cocktail reception, accompanied by a duet of electronic music and live Uzbek band performing on folk instruments, became a wonderful way to finish the official part. Tashkent struck all guests as a beautiful city, with clean and wide streets, shady parks and fountains.

Moreover, all guests were able to meet both legal community of Uzbekistan and its rich cultural and historical heritage, as well as nature and authentic cuisine. For everyone who wanted to get a closer look at the country, event hosts organized a tour through its cities Tashkent, Samarkand, Bukhara, the Kyzyl-Kum desert and Khiva. The guests were able to see the beautiful antique monuments and architecture protected by UNESCO, visit a ski resort, buy national clothes, ceramics and wooden souvenirs with the finest carved ornaments.

Uzbekistan is a country with an ancient history and traditions, rich in historical artifacts, trade and crafts since the days of the Great Silk Road. It is the country with actively developing business and tourism, oil and gas reserves It was globally ranked globally third in export area, sixth — in cotton production, seventh — in uranium reserves, fourth — in terms of reserves, and seventh — in gold production. Without a doubt, it was one of the most interesting venues where Pravo.ru organized the International Legal Week Forum. All guests will remember it for both its acute official program and originality

We filed a lawsuit against the customer in the Krasnodar Region Commercial Court to recover the costs of works paid and penalties for overdue payment. In addition, we referred to the fact that upon completing the works, parties had a partial settlement, including the disputed contract, accepted by the customer without a word. In court the customer claimed that the evidence provided by ABYs lawyers was falsified, However, the examination appointed by the court confirmed that the signatures and seals of the customer to be authentic.

On September 6, 2021, the Krasnodar Region Commercial Court satisfied the clients claim fully, and recovered work costs of 36 562 304.15 RUB (taking into account previous settlement) and a penalty of 35 418 214.65 RUB.

The Fifteenth Commercial Appeal Court upheld the decision of the first instance court on February 19, 2022.

Senior associate Sergey Radchenko represented the clients in the court of first and appeal instances.

According to Part 7, Art. 10.3, Federal Law No. 149-FZ dated 27.07.2006 "On Information, Information Technologies and Information Protection", if a search engine operator fails to justify its refusal, a person has right to file into the court a claim on blocking search results about information specified in the applicants request.

The client did not agree with the refusal of the search engine operators, since the posted data was irrelevant and lost its meaning due to subsequent events, as well as photos were posted illegally, without the clients consent. In particular, it breached Art. 152.1 (the Russian Civil Code “Protection of the citizens image”), which violated the rights and legitimate interests of the client. The unreliable information was verified by the documents collected and provided by us.

On February 22, 2022, the Krasnodar Oktyabrsky District Court decided to satisfy the claim in full. This court decision will allow to block the search results of unreliable and irrelevant data about the ABYs client in search engines on the Internet.

Yuri Pustovit, ABYs Managing partner, represented the clients interests in the court

During the case two forensic examinations were conducted. According to the first expert, the contract was signed by the defendant, however, ABY managed to achieve that the court appointed the second complex examination. The second expert discovered that the signature was executed by another person and the contract was made four years later than it was dated. These conclusions, as well as a number of other inconsistencies and indirect signs indicated by ABY, allowed us to convince the court that the main evidence was falsified. The court refused to satisfy the plaintiffs claims in full.

ABYs lawyer Zakhar Khrebtov represented the client’s interests in the court.

The ranking evaluated three significant projects in which lawyers took part from September 2020 to September 2021, their legal experience, employment period in a company, special achievements and awards (for example, participation in other rankings). Advocates Bureau Yug is represented in Pravo.ru-300 by two lawyers.

Yuri Pustovit, ABY’s Managing partner:

- Arbitration proceedings (major disputes) - 1 band;

- Dispute resolution in courts of general jurisdiction – 2 band.

Sergey Radchenko, ABY’s Head of Judicial and arbitration practice:

- Arbitration proceedings (major disputes) - 1 band;

- Dispute resolution in courts of general jurisdiction – 2 band.

The Individual Legal Ranking “Pravo.ru-300”

The event was held in Radisson Rosa Khutor Hotel – the place was not chosen by chance. According to the organizers, the Sochi ski resort, located in Krasnaya Polyana, is an ideal place for such events, since it allows you to organize both fruitful work and enjoy quality rest. While welcoming the participants, Yuri Pustovit, Managing Partner of the Advocates Bureau Yug, noted that such meetings in Sochi, during the ski season, are becoming a tradition. And despite charms of online events, live communication remains the most effective way of interaction.

By the way, "interaction" was the main concept of the both informal and business parts of the forum. The main agenda involved topics on interaction within a companies, among themselves and relations between business and the state.

Financial transparency and attorney-client privilege

Speech by Vladimir Efremov, partner of the company "Arbitration.ru", about "Forced financial transparency of lawyers and business" aroused great interest and became the subject of lively discussions. The speaker highlighted the trends of "anti-laundering" regulations, stipulated by the Central Bank and Rosfinmonitoring in 2022.

Now, in order to stimulate more effective legalization of crime profits, all entrepreneurs and organizations providing legal services are required to identify their clients, monitor transactions and report any cases of suspicions payments to Rosfinmonitoring. These actions are not recognized as a violation of attorney-client privilege.

The data is to be transmitted under certain procedure, and managements of law firms are obliged to develop internal control regulations for their employees, which shall stipulate the said procedure, deadlines for data providing, forms of documents, etc. The following sanctions will be applied to organizations that do not comply with the new requirements: a fine of 400.000 RUB and banking restrictions (blocked accounts, refusal to conduct transactions).

"Traffic light" from the Central Bank

Another innovation is expected in the summer. This federal law comes into force on July 1, which launches the KYC (Know Your Customer) platform from the Central Bank. A program is based on daily data on all questionable transactions conducted in the country (collected data on all current bank accounts), will divide Russian business into three risk levels: green, yellow, red.

Customers of the red zone will be completely cut off from the banking system. They will not be able to open accounts, conduct transactions, transfer funds. Moreover, they will be deprived of the right to use funds from their current bank account.

Similar, albeit smaller, sanctions are expected by customers of the yellow zone.

Upon receiving information from the Central Bank, banks will be required to consider the degree of risks determined by Rosfinmonitoring and respond accordingly. The system is already working in test mode, and Russian lawyers will have to identify there each potential client, preferably, before signing the contract.

If we talk about how these innovations can affect the activities of law firms in real life, then, in addition to the increased flow of documents and new job responsibilities for employees, as well as the risk of 0.5 million rubles fine, the relations with clients, who can no longer count on attorney-client confidentiality, will likely deteriorate significantly. Moreover, Vladimir Efremov stressed in his speech that there is a risk for law firms to be in the "red zone" themselves.

“Rosfinmonitoring and the Central Bank have an internal data exchange, informing banks about companies to which they must pay attention and additionally check their activities,” Efremov said. “If a law firm has many clients from yellow and red zones, and if Rosfinmonitoring sends a recommendation to the bank, saying to pay extra attention the said firm, then general measures will be applied to the law firm in accordance with the law “On countering the legalization (laundering) of crime profits ...”. To put it simply, even one client from the "red zone" will drag down their lawyer or law firm. Thus, the company may face with a refusal to conduct transactions on the current bank account, to use the funds on the account. There is also a possibility that the bank unilaterally terminates service agreement with the company or even bans it from opening new bank accounts.

The personal data “worth”

Mikhail Khokholkov, the leading lawyer of the Law Firm INTELLECT, spoke about changes in the law "On Personal Data", which will adjust the activities of all lawyers and advocates, as well as most modern digital projects, including startups. One of these changes will involve biometric data, including photos.

Previously Roskomnadzor’s explanation stated that a photo can be considered biometrics only when certain conditions (GOST, angle, requirements) are met. Last year in Decembe this explanation officially lost its relevance. So far, lawyers do not fully understand how to act in new conditions. However, it is clear that it will not be possible to use photographic materials as before. This is especially true for small and medium-sized projects that simply will not be able to pass the necessary accreditation, as one of the requirements for its successful completion is the authorized capital of 50 million rubles for an operator who plans to use biometrics processing for authentication in their activities. Regarding identification, the financial security should already amount to 100 million rubles.

Only major players will be able to comply with the new requirements, while representatives of medium and small businesses must either find opportunities for multimillion-dollar support to implement their projects, or otherwise develop business processes, excluding the use of biometrics.

At risk: media, lawyers, notaries

The risks under new conditions are that the number of complaints received by Roskomnadzor from citizens may increase, particularly, due to the Citizens Legal Protection Center in the digital environment created by Roskomnadzor. Over the past year alone, the center has prepared over a thousand applications to the courts. Now it may happen more often.

If previously, upon receiving a complaint, Roskomnadzor carried out a lengthy procedure before drawing up a protocol, now the documents are immediately sent to the court. Accordingly, lawyers should be ready to protect interests of companies. “The innovation can become a means of unfair competition,” noted Mikhail Khokholkov, a leading lawyer at Law Firm INTELLECT, a member of the Roskomnadzor working group on Personal Data, a member of the expert council on advertising legislation of the FAS of the Russian Federation.

“We are already seeing such a problem, especially in the cases of our clients, the media, who, by virtue of their professional activities, somehow operate with personal data,” said Khokholkov. “And we see how the number of appeals keeps increasing, no matter reasons.

The problem is that if the request is made within the framework of the law on personal data, each operator must respond to it. The lack of an answer is an independent part of an administrative offense, very painful one. This is also relevant for liquidators, for lawyers who operate with evidence, personal data of witnesses and other participants in the process. We have already met such cases, too.”

International experience

The speech of a Siemens representative aroused a great interest. Anastasia Fomicheva, Director of the Legal and Ethical Compliance Department of Siemens Healthcare, spoke about the working specifics of a large international company.

“In 2007, I came to work at Siemen and as a Russian lawyer I was surprised that the contract necessarily provides for a provision on limited liability,” Anastasia Fomicheva said. “For me it was something new, incomprehensible, unusual. But over time, I got an interesting answer. If we hypothetically imagine a situation when there is a sudden breach of obligations under all the contracts that Siemens has concluded, and the liability will not be limited, then this will force the company to pay unlimited amounts to all its counterparties. As a result, this can lead to the companys bankruptcy. Of course, such a situation is unlikely, but this is the peculiar view of a foreign companies. If there is a risk (even if it is theoretical and, most likely, from the field of fiction), it should be excluded.”

Non-fulfillment of technical conditions equals termination of the contract

During his speech Sergey Radchenko, Senior associate at the Advocates Bureau Yug, suggested considering a common case: the customer fails to fulfill obligations under the contract with the network company on technological connection. In this situation, how can the network company terminate the contract and reimburse its expenses?

“There is a huge amount of judicial practice,” said Sergey Radchenko. “Over the past 10 years I have studied it all and I can say that this is an absolutely typical situation when a network company fulfills its obligations, spends a lot of money, then comes to its senses, but the tariff has already been exceeded, and the customer is in no hurry to pay. This is where the litigation begins.”

According to his own experience, Sergey Radchenko further explained that the company had managed to build a substation, laid cable lines, built air networks (with enormous costs), but payment was not received. Logically, the performer wanted to terminate relationship with a negligent client and reimburse the expenses. Sergey Radchenko offered practical guidance on how to get out of this situation.

One can terminate the contract for several reasons:

- Part 2, Article 328, the Russian Civil Code (the so-called foreseeable violation) with the recovery of losses calculated according to the model of negative contractual interest;

- Article 450, the Russian Civil (essential breach of the contract with the recovery of all expenses incurred as losses);

- Article 451, the Russian Civil Code on significant change in circumstances (expenses are collected on the basis of a courts decision, according to which the costs are fairly divided by the parties).

Regarding what exactly can be recovered the speaker also offered here several options:

- costs (for the preparation and issuance of technical conditions, their approval by the system operator, as well as for the preparation of necessary documentation and execution of design and construction works);

- VAT (20% regardless of the time of signing the contract);

- penalty (within the term of the contract and technical conditions).

As evidence, one can submit any accounting documentation, works performance contract, and, if necessary, the results of the examination.

Sergey Radchenko also noted that judicial practice established a rule that is not in the law, but nevertheless it is relevant.

“It is impossible to collect expenses more than the tariff for technical connection”, the speaker noted. “But what if the amount of expenses is higher? Practice shows that it is still impossible to recover, no matter how much the costs exceed the tariffs. But recently, a new practice has been very cautiously emerging, according to which the network company can add this difference to the tariff for electricity transmission services.

The experts of the forum highlighted the maximum number of questions from various branches of law. During the working sessions, the legal risks of business, including those related to such a large-scale area as bankruptcy, were discussed. The participants of the sessions discussed proposals for making business decisions, gave recommendations on determining the insolvency of counterparties. They also considered an algorithm for assessing risks and profits when deciding on the involvement of a company in litigation.

At the end of the working sessions, the forum participants noted how effective the business program of the event was, as well as its informal part. Thanks to this combination, the delegates had the opportunity to relax and share their experiences at the same time.

The Winter Legal Forum of the Southern Russia was held in Sochi for the second time, however, for many years the web-portal Pravo.ru and Advocates Bureau Yug have been the organizers of similar autumn event, which takes place in September in the coastal part of the resort. In 2022, the forum in autumn will gather guests and participants for the 14th time.

Sergey Kovalev, Managing Partner of the Bar Association “Kovalev, Tugushi and Partners”:

“All speakers were interesting. The business program is a concentrated squeeze of red lines in favour of business and lawyerrs. The organizers managed to find the right format and the right speakers. As for the informal part, the atmosphere is very pleasing. There are many lawyers at the forum who can communicate with each other in a comfortable environment, find common ground. Usually we encounter, as a rule, only when we have joint problems. And we often find ourselves on different sides of the barricades. And here, the meeting with opponents takes place in a comfortable atmosphere, you can talk about abstract topics without touching everyday problems and get to know a person from the other side. Its always good and pleasant experience

Yuri Pustovit, Managing Partner of Advocates Bureau Yug:»

“As one of the organizer, I can note that the current agenda of the forum is vivid discussions, which means that the topics resonate with experience of participants and speakers.

If we compare the current forum with the last years one, then in 2021 it was more intimate, and the atmosphere was almost family-like. However, I am glad that the number of participants is increasing. If last year we received about 70 guests, now it is almost three times more. The geography of the event has also expanded, and lawyers not only from Moscow and St. Petersburg, but also from various regions of Russia, including Vladivostok and Siberia, came to Sochi. This year we deliberately made the business part capacious and expanded the informal program, giving our guests the opportunity to take part in winter sports competitions and get enjoyment on the mountain slopes. Lawyers usually work a lot and have little rest, so the balance is shifted towards informal communication, which proved to be important and effective.”

Alexey Otradnov, Commercial Director of the web-portal “Pravo.ru”:

“Last year brought together about 70 participants, now there are more than two hundred, such growth is certainly pleasing. The event has become larger, still intense and, I believe, will continue to develop and grow in the future. We see that the delegates really like the format, everyone is actively working. If we talk about the practical benefits of the event, I note that we are uniting the market. This is a unique and useful opportunity to communicate. Plus, we try to highlight the relevant: the agenda in the area of bankruptcy and litigation, everything that happens on the market in general, and give our participants the most saturated information.”

Loss includes costs of sowing and loss of profit, i.e. the profit that the buyer failed to gain due to poor quality of the seed supplied. The client filed counterclaim against the buyer to recover the debt on payment of the disputed seeds and a loan for the use of funds in the amount of 15.000.000 RUB.

The Krasnodar Region Commercial Court satisfied the farmers claim fully and dismissed the clients counterclaim.

ABYs lawyers took on the case after the Court had made a decision. We analyzed the case and prepared an appeal claim. We pointed out that the Krasnodar Region Commercial Court had no proofs of poor quality of the seed supplied, since Rosselkhoznadzor conducted two inspections and confirmed that the seeds comply with GOST standards. Thus, the Court had no reasons to believe the pre-trial examination, as it was not actually carried out, and the quality claim was filed beyond the contracts time limit, and the farmer provided no proof of losss amount and violated rules for its calculation.

The 15th Commercial Appeal court agreed with ABYs arguments, canceled the previous decision. Dismissed the buyers claim and satisfied the clients counterclaim fully.

The clients interests were represented by ABYs Senior Associate Sergey Radchenko.

Please, follow the link to watch video news of Kuban24 TV channel.

The client was involved in the trial as a third party, but subsequently became a defendant. The clients shareholder estimated the losses of 1.4 billion rubles. However, within 2.5 years the shareholder failed to provide any convincing evidence that controversial transactions had caused negative consequences to the client. The shareholders claim created significant risks for the client, as the client would have to return raw materials (received under the transaction) to the counterparty. Taking into account the market prices, it would cost about 1.4 billion RUB, which might would call into question financial and economic state of the client and caused to cease his business.

The Commercial Court of the Bashkortostan Republic agreed with our argument and dismissed the shareholders claim. The motivation of the decision on our appeal claim was adjusted by the 18th Commercial Appeal Court. The Ural District Arbitration Court upheld the said decisions.

ABYs lawyer Ekaterina Fedenko represented interests of the client in trial.

The Commercial Court of the Bashkortostan Republic agreed with our argument and dismissed the shareholders claim. The motivation of the decision on our appeal claim was adjusted by the 18th Commercial Appeal Court. The Ural District Arbitration Court upheld the said decisions.

ABYs lawyer Ekaterina Fedenko represented interests of the client in trial.

represented interests of the client in trial.

The case has been hearing in the Krasnodar Region Commercial court for almost two years. Despite the evidence presented, the court concluded that transactions damage property rights of creditors. The court recognized the deals to be imaginary and used as a cover-up of payment for defamatory publications. Thus, the court fully satisfied the claim.

However, the board of judges of the 15th Commercial Appeal court canceled the ruling of the Krasnodar Region Commercial court and dismissed claims of insolvency representative.

During the appeal consideration it was possible to prove that the disputed deals had a reimbursable and real nature, and were concluded under normal market conditions and in favour of the debtor. The Appeal court recognized that exhaustive evidence of the parties’ legal relations was left unassessed properly. The court recognized no collusion between the parties, no intentions to cause damage to the debtor, no unfair behavior (abuse of law).

As a result, the initial decision was canceled, the insolvency representative claims were refused. The client’s interests were represented by a lawyer Alexey Demekhin.

The Krasnodar Region Commercial Court fully satisfied the claim.

We took the case during appeal proceedings. We managed to prove an appeal court that the Company was managed jointly by the client and his business partner and, therefore, both shareholder can recover no losses of the Company from each other. The appeal court agreed with our arguments and reduced the amount of the clients liability from 5.4 billion RUB to 300.000 RUB.

Our opponents filed a cassation appeal against the appeal courts ruling. We participated in the court hearings in the Commercial Court of the North Caucasus District. The District Court agreed with ABYs legal position and upheld the appeal decision.

Managing partner Yuri Pustovit and Senior associate Sergey Radchenko represented the clients interests in the court of cassation.

The client filed an appeal to the Stavropol Region Commercial Court against the water supplier. The client claimed to recover the fines imposed as damages. The supplier filed a counterclaim against the client, asking to recover reputational damage, caused, allegedly, by the fact that the client did not involve the supplier in the cases considered by the Stavropol Region Commercial Court. The court declined the clients claim and satisfied the suppliers one. Upon making the decision, and at the suppliers request, the court took measures to ensure the decisions enforcement and seized the clients property in the amount of recovered damages.

We took the case after the court made the decision. We prepared appeals against the decision and enforcement measures. The Sixteenth Commercial Appeal Court canceled enforcement measures at first hearing and proceeded to consider the case under regulations of first instance courts. On November 24, 2021, the court made a resolution canceling the decision of first instance court, canceling the initial claim and counterclaim.

Senior associate Sergey Radchenko and associate Ekaterina Fedenko represented the clients interests in the appeal court.

The ranking keeps evolving every year, making its research more complex and deeper, meanwhile new participants and nominations appear. This year innovation of the ranking was to divide some law areas into subgroups: large disputes and medium disputes. The Arbitration proceedings — major focus of Advocates Bureau Yug —underwent the change.

According to the ranking, the ABY was nominated as follows:

Arbitration proceedings (High market) - 1 band;

-Dispute resolution in courts of general jurisdiction – 2 band;

- Revenue volume - 8th place.

Despite the increasing competition and worthy players in the legal market, this year Advocates Bureau Yug proved reputation of high level law firm. Of course, every ABY’s employee made a contribution to a well-deserved victory and a rightful place in the ranking.

To see other results of the ranking, please, follow the link: https://300.pravo.ru/award/search/?AwardSearch%5Bawardee%5D=1&AwardSearch%5Bquery%5D=Юг

The guests discussed various trends in jurisprudence: trends in judicial practice on bringing to criminal responsibility for losses caused in bankruptcy; criminal prosecution of lawyers and attorneys; development of business mediation in Russia; benefits of family disputes for lawyers; offline vs online court trials; working legal marketing tools and so on.

Sergey Radchenkos speech aroused animated discussion among the participants. It covered specifics of the southern region such as court cases related to the electric power industry, fine charging for marine pollution, personal bankruptcies, unauthorized construction, land seizure from foreigners, business seizure, and consumer extremism.

The analysis was carried out on the basis of questionnaires sent by companies. The data reflects the total amount recovered as a result of the dispute, the number of decisions in the final instances, the trial result and the average amount of the dispute. The analysis was also based on data upon examining several thousand court decisions adopted by commercial courts during 2020.

Thus, analysts divided the leading firms into two groups: law firms with long-standing (more than 30 cases per year) and boutique practices (10-30 cases per year).

Advocates Bureau YUG also took part of the examination and was included into the third band of federal ranking of companies with boutique practice.

For further information, please, follow the link to “Pravo.Ru” website: сайте «Право.Ru» https://pravo.ru/story/235078/

platforms. Moreover, such cases affect millions of citizens who are users of the data blocked by the court.

“Such disputes are peculiar due to parties involved. Under the law the authority acts as the plaintiff is the authority, and the website owner acts as the defendant, but only if the owner can be identified. Usually the authorities prefer to not waste time. Therefore, there are the following parties in such cases in real trial — the prosecutor as the plaintiff and Rospotrebnadzor as the defendant. The latter does not respond to the claim, and on this basis the court satisfies the claim on blocking the data,” Mr. Zaytsev explained, “but recently such cases are increasing in number. And the cause is prosecutors creating positive statistics for themselves.

Roman Zaitsev pointed out that nowadays many Internet websites were unprotected from blocking. While considering such cases the courts focus on whether there is administrative responsibility for actions described in website data. If so, the website can be blocked. “People use gaps in the law to block their competitors. Therefore, if you encounter such a case, I remind you that during proceedings the court shall not mix cases on blocking information and blocking activities of publishing houses,” Mr. Zaitsev said, “Data on the Internet shall not be subjected to unjustified restrictions.”

Business protection

If the first part of the official program covered such topics as how to competently protect the business, the second part was dedicated to how companies shall conduct their activities so as to not cross borders and to not be subject to liability under the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Anton Gusev, Head of the Criminal Defense Practice at Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner (Russia) LLP, spoke about how current business issues can lead to serious consequences using a well-known company as the example.

“To attract foreign partners the company opened a subsidiary in Cyprus in the mid-90s. At that time, it was quite a common practice. Nowadays it is a whole holding company which owns various properties. The management remembers about the foreign subsidiaries and decides to buy the shares back. These transactions lead to FSB checking. A case was initiated on performing currency operations of transferring funds in foreign currency to non-resident accounts using forged documents. At the same time, fraud was incriminated on a particularly large scale,” Anton Gusev said.

He also urged his colleagues to be careful when making such transactions and to prepare documents thoroughly. “In such a situation,” Mr. Gusev said, “companies can also be imputed to tax evasion and withdrawal of money to foreign accounts.

Maria Korchagina, partner of the Advocates Bureau ZKS, advised on how to protect the company from illegal or untimely seizure of documents by law enforcement agencies.

According to Maria, nowadays law enforcement officers are actively working in this direction, but they are not always driven by the law. They are often involved by competitors or contractors who need to initiate a criminal case against an entrepreneur in order to use it in civil proceedings.

“Practice shows that it is better to not store important documents in the office at all. It prevents such situations when law enforcement officers seize all the documents paralyzing activity of the company,” the expert recommended.

According to Maria Korchagina, large companies should store documents in a remote archive and pay for it from the companys accounts. Moreover, the expert is sure that only two or three employees of the company shall know the location of the documents.

“Upon seizure, investigative and other authorities may store documents up to 10 years. During this time, entrepreneurs may need certain documents, but they will not be available. Therefore, it is better to keep in the office only current documents and reports on the unclosed tax period,” Maria Korchagina said.

The expert also recommended that small and medium-sized businesses shall not forget to protect the documents and organize appropriate staff training so that employees would know how to act in situations when documents might be seized.

The expert pointed out the significance of storing electronic documentation. She noted that it is very important to have a secure server, to save files on foreign clouds, as well as to establish remote access to the said server at any time. It may help you to stop data downloading, even if authorities have already started copying it.

Predictive protection

Upon discussing possible threat scenarios for business, the forum guests smoothly moved to minimizing them. Olga Zhdanova, a partner at INTELLECT, gave some tips on how to protect yourself from challenging transactions in the event of a counterpartys bankruptcy. According to the expert, the most important thing is to make sure that the transaction is real. Moreover, it is important to fill out the primary documents correctly, to avoid offsets and payments to third parties.

In his turn, Sergey Shorin, Head of M&A department of Pepeliaev Group, focused on one universal mechanism which ensured the interests of both parties in the transaction. The expert explained that it was wrong to reduce such a tool as an escrow account exclusively to shared-equity construction. “It has a much wider scope of application,” Mr. Shorin said.

“When the seller and the buyer do not trust each other, there is a suspended state when one of them shall take the first step. Escrow just allows one to solve this "first step" problem,” Sergey Shorin added. Moreover, if initially only a bank could act as an escrow agent, now Russian legislation does not contain such a restriction. Particularly, an independent third party may be a lawyer, an attorney, a law firm, a notary public. In Germany, for example, the escrow agent is a bank only in half of the cases, in the remaining 50 % — lawyers and notaries. In Russia, lawyers could also provide an additional service to their clients and act as a guarantor of transactions.

The name defines

Upon discussing all the tools and mechanisms for helping entrepreneurs and other clients, the lawyers moved on to a discussion on how to attract a principal. In particular, the topic of the final session covered a topic of building a lawyers personal brand.

“Building a personal brand resembles the building of communism: many people wanted, but only few succeeded,” Ruslan Ibragimov, MTS Vice president for communication with state authorities, drew an analogy. Moreover, a personal brand is based on two pillars – reputation and scope. The workplace, personal and professional qualities, ideas with which a lawyer goes out to the public are important. One can talk about a lawyers personal brand when the lawyer is known by people beyond his law colleagues.

At the very beginning of the discussion, the guests came to the conclusion that the product is a priority. And it is important that the packaging promoted by a lawyer corresponds to its internal content.

Andrey Panov, advisor from Allen & Overy, noted that posts in SNS and mentions in the media are just a projection. “And if it does not correspond to reality, the legal market will find out about it sooner or later,” the expert said.

Ivan Apatov, Managing partner of White Collar Strategy, suggested that a lawyers personal brand is how he copes with any crisis situations.

Natalia Totahevage, Director of Legal Affairs at Abbott Laboratories, also pointed out in her speech that one shall proceed carefully while building a personal brand. “Sometimes it is better to make small conscious efforts or even take a pause, rather than uncontrollably trying to express yourself in different guises,” she stressed.

“The law is one big system of risk distribution between different entities. And we, as lawyers, should analyze these risks and reduce them to zero wherever it is possible,” Yuri Pustovit concluded at the end of the forum.

He also noted that guests of the Legal Forum of the South of Russia 2021discussed in detail how exactly it shall be done. It means that they will return to work with new ideas and information about unique cases.

The forum ended with a sailing regatta, where guest were divided into teams and honed their sailing skills. The winners were honored with medals and champagne.

While the court of first instance was considering the cases, several grave procedural violations took place: the client (defendant) was improperly informed about the hearings, court decisions and the very existence of court cases. The ABY’s client learned about the said when the plaintiffs presented writs of execution into the bank to write off funds recovered by the court. Moreover, the court failed to appoint forensic examinations, but based its decisions on extremely dubious expert opinions carried out by the plaintiffs at their own expense before the trial. Also, the plaintiffs applied ‘judicial tourism’ in a districts of the Krasnodar region.

During consideration of cases in the Krasnodar Regional Court, our opponents tried in every possible way to get the proceedings on cases suspended or delayed, while abusing procedural rights. Nevertheless, we managed to get the appeals considered on the merits. The appeal court agreed with ABY’s arguments, canceled all three decisions and made new ones. According to them, the court refused to satisfy the plaintiffs’ claims in full.

Associate Zakhar Khrebtov and Senior associate Sergey Radchenko represented the client’s interests in the court.

The guests of the event were pros, who achieved significant success in various areas: science and education, medicine and art, business and management. The contest was accompanied by the media project ‘Triumph: Story of Success’. During the year, while the finalists are being selected, Yug Times Weekly publishes articles about career, aspirations and values of the nominees in its weekly edition and website.

The winner award ceremony ‘Triumph 2020-2021’ took place at the Krasnodar Academic Drama Theater named after Maxim Gorky.

Lawyer Alexey Demekhin received the award for his achievements in jurisprudence area.

Yuri Pustovit, Managing Partner of Advocates Bureau Yug, has been recommended as the best lawyer since 2016 in such law areas as Arbitration and Mediation, Energy and Natural Resources Law, Land Use and Zoning Law, Litigation.

Senior associate Sergey Radchenko has been a represented in the ranking since 2020 as the best lawyer in such law areas as Litigation and Real Estate Law.

Please, for more information about the ranking follow the link: https://www.bestlawyers.com/russia/krasnodar/litigation

The award ceremony took place on June 12 — the Russian Advocacy Day. The celebration was held in the great hall of the Kuban Cossack Choir. Lawyers of the Krasnodar region were invited to the event.

Advocates Bureau Yug represented the interests of the plant and the supplier in this case. We developed a legal position for our clients and represented their interests in the court of first instance. We highlighted that there are no grounds in this case for invalidation of transactions, since they are not large, and these transactions did not involve alienation of the plants property. Also, there were no mandatory sign of damage for invalidation of transactions as related-party ones. All the transactions gain economic profit for the plant as they as they save money for purchase of raw materials. Moreover, the plant receives agency fees under the transactions, as 1.4 billion RUB transferred by the plant to the supplier are the money received by the plant due to sale of metal products owned by the supplier. And as a result, this money belongs to the supplier, not the plant.

The Bashkortostan Republic Commercial Court agreed with our legal position and dismissed the claim fully on June 1, 2021.

Senior associate Sergey Radchenko and associate Ekaterina Fedenko represented both clients in the court.

Please, follow the link to read the full interview: https://yugtimes.com/news/68901/

On order to take part in the survey, law firms had to provide data on several cases, monetary value of all cases in millions of rubles and average value of the claim. The classification of federal companies was divided according to the number of cases for 2020 year. Thus, two bands were allocated: 1st — from 30 cases and above, 2nd — from 10 to 30 cases. The regional ranking had no gradation.

Advocates Bureau Yug was ranked as regional litigators and took 1st place in 1st band. For more information, please visit the website of “Pravo.ru” https://300.pravo.ru/news/231718/?rating_desc_chrono_2_1

We turned courts attention to the following facts: all the decrees challenged by the prose-cutor are lawful; initially, the land plot was formed in accordance with requirements of land and urban planning legislations; all sub-sequent transactions with the land plot, and land plots removed from it, were lawful; citizensbuyers were goodfaith acquirers, thus, there were no grounds to invalidate their rights to the land plots and remove the latter from the cadastral register

On October 6, 2020 the Azov City Court satisfied the claims. Therefore, we filed an ap-peal claim, and on April 21, 2021, the Rostov Region Court cancel the previous decision and dismissed initial claims.

Senior associate Sergey Radchenko represented the clients in courts of first and appeal instances.

The last championship was to be held in Sochi. However, Russia closed its borders and introduced pandemic restrictions banning mass events.

The company tried to recover the money prepaid for the services on championship organizing and accommodation, but to no avail. Russian contractor referred to the lack of proof of force majeure regarding relations of the parties, as well as to penalties under the contract.

The judge found defendants objections groundless. The Krasnodar Region Commercial Court satisfied the client’s claims on April 29, 2021.

ABY’s lawyer Alexey Demekhin defended the client in the trial.

Yuri Pustovit, ABYs Managing partner, and Sergey Radchenko, ABY Senior associate, also got individual recommendations in Business Law. Band 1 an d Band 2, respectively.

The clients recognize Advocates Bureau Yug as a results-oriented firm with lawyers, who can find the best solutions.

According to survey results, Chambers noted that Yuri Pustovit was widely known in the legal market for his outstanding skills in corporate litigation and disputes with state authorities. An impressed client emphasizes his goal-oriented approach.

Chambers stated that Sergey Radchenko is qualified in wide range of corporate and corporate disputes. The interlocutor reported that he has "a non-standard approach and interesting solutions." Another source notes: "He combines the theoretical and practical sides."

The Chambers Europe ranking has been held every year for about 30 years. Lawyers and law firms are ranked according to several parameters, each studied by the research team. Chambers does not have any points system. The customers satisfaction is a crucial criterion, but Chambers also takes into account technical skills, diversity of experience, team stability and a commercial approach. The year-long study includes interviews with those who are active in the market - mostly clients and other lawyers, as well as an assessment of recent work done.

Follow the link to view the rating

According to the ranking 2021, Advocates Bureau Yug was recognized as one of the best law firms in Russia. It also got recommendations in 2 law areas and 2 individual recommendations.

In category “The best law firms” Advocates Bureau Yug was recognized for:

- Arbitration and corporate dispute resolution, mid-market, regional ranking, Band 1,

- Disputes resolution in general jurisdiction courts, property relation disputes, regional ranking.

In category “Individual lawyers ranking”, ABYs Managing partner Yuri Pustovit got recommendations in the following categories: Corporate dispute resolution (regional ranking) and Disputes resolution in general jurisdiction courts (regional ranking).

Follow the link to view the rating

We developed a legal position for the client and represented his interests in the court. We pointed out that the plaintiff has no legitimate interest in invalidating the contract, as it has not been proved that the disputed contract violated his rights. Moreover, there are different subjects of the clients contracts with the plaintiff and with the second contractor, and both the client and the second contractor fulfilled properly their obligations under the disputed contract. Thus, by claiming the plaintiff illegitimately interfered in others peoples private life, which violated basic principles of civil law.

The Commercial court of the Krasnodar region dismissed the claim on September 28, 2020. On December 14th, 2020, the 15th Appeal Commercial Court uphold the said decision. The Commercial Court of North Caucasian Federal District dismissed the plaintiffs cassation appeal on March 4th, 2021.

Senior associate Sergey Radchenko represented the clients during proceedings.

Yuri Pustovit Arbitration, 1 Band;

Sergey Radchenko Arbitration, 1 Band.

The ranking methodology is based on the most significant projects specified in the questionnaire from September 2019 to September 2020 (the study period) in 29 areas of law. The lawyers included in the "recommended" list were supposed to play a key role in the highest-rated projects of 2020 business season.

The main topic of the Conference was an impressive list of risks awaiting business in 2021. Two sessions were held as a part of the business program. There were considered main triggers, which might lead companies to violations of the law and lawsuits.

At the Conference experts analyzed issues of operating a business during the pandemic and new legislations after quarantine, new regulations on cash transaction control and tax optimizations.

Sergey Radchenko, a moderator of the first session and Senior associate of Advocates Bureau YUG, started the conference inviting his colleagues to a professional and open dialogue.

"Nowadays entrepreneurs must bear more responsibility that ever towards their business and contracts to be concluded. Risks related to banking and tax systems often may lead to litigations, which could have been avoided beforehand," Sergey Radchenko said.

During the discussion, experts agreed that business may be held accountable for minor shortcomings. Nevertheless, the sanctions shall be applied the same as for serious offenses, such as money laundering, for example. Moreover, the lawyers noted that the majority of criminal cases against entrepreneurs were ruled in their favor, but they lasted for a long time and affected business.

According to Alexey Otradnov, organizer and Commercial director of Pravo.ru, the Conference was held so as to aid business community in considering all possible risks. He also noted the importance of professional networking.

“While taking into account all news in the legislative sphere, we selected such a content, that both corporate lawyers and consultants were able to meet on the same platform. They always have to recognize all the risks in advance and find solutions,” Alexey Otradnov said.

Read more about the Winter Legal Week Conference in the next issue of the Yug Times Weekly.

The client filed a claim into the court where he asked to recognize the bailiff’s decision illegal due to four grounds:

1) bailiff has no such authority,

2) the client was not duly notified about a place and time of the minutes and decision,

3) the client violated no time terms,

4) the client did everything possible to avoid the violation.

The commercial court of Bashkortostan Republic agreed with us and satisfied the client’s claim on December 26, 2020. The court canceled the bailiff’s decision and recognized it illegal.

The associate Ekaterina Fedenko represented the client’s interests.

Рейтинг юридических фирм, практикующих в России, «Право.ру-300» для объективности результатов разделяется на федеральный и региональный. Адвокатское бюро «Юг» заняло места в двух отраслях права регионального рейтинга:

Арбитражное судопроизводство первая группа,

Разрешение споров в судах общей юрисдикции - вторая группа.

В номинации «Топ юридических компаний по выручке» Адвокатское бюро «Юг» заняло в региональном рейтинге 7 место из 30 возможных

В ходе судебного разбирательства нам удалось убедить суд в том, приглашение на работу не содержало всех существенных условий трудового договора и означала лишь предварительное согласование кандидатуры истца, кроме того, истец не соответствовал должности по своим деловым качествам, требование же о взыскании неполученной заработной платы за несколько месяцев не подлежало удовлетворению, поскольку заработная плата – это вознаграждение за труд и она зависит только от количества и качества затраченного труда. Суд отказал в удовлетворении исковых требований по этому делу в полном объеме.

Интересы клиента в Прикубанском районном суде Краснодара представляли старший юрист Сергей Радченко и юрист Захар Хребтов.

Мы разработали для клиента правовую позицию и представляли его интересы в суде. Мы обратили внимание суда на то, что у истца нет законного интереса в признании договора недействительным, он не доказал как оспариваемый им договор нарушает его права, предметы договора с истцом и с вторым подрядчиком не совпадают, оспариваемая сделка исполнена клиентом и вторым подрядчиком в полном объёме, предъявление иска является попыткой истца произвольно вмешаться в чужие частные дела, что нарушает основные начала гражданского законодательства.

Решением Арбитражного суда Краснодарского края от 28.09.2020 г. в иске отказано.

Интересы доверителя в Арбитражном суде Краснодарского края представлял управляющий партнер Юрий Пустовит и старший юрист Сергей Радченко.

На XII юридическом форуме юга России нотариус Елена Глушко взяла миниинтервью у управляющего партнера Адвокатского бюро «Юг» Юрия Пустовита. Обсуждались вопросы клиентоориентированности при обрещении к нотариусу, другие сложные моменты, разбирали "живые" примеры. Юрий Пустовит объяснил что важно для него, как для клиента, при обращении к нотариусу, и почему.

Юрий Пустовит рекомендуется изданием Best Lawyers как лучший в нескольких областях права: «Энергетика и природные ресурсы», «Земельное право» и «Разрешение судебных споров». Сергей Радченко стабильно остается лучшим в категории «Разрешение судебных споров».

Справочник Best Lawyers публикуется с 1983 года. На сегодняшний день в нем есть информация о лучших юристах из более чем 70 стран мира.

Форум приглашал к участию адвокатов, консультантов, инхаус-юристов, а также представителей государственной службы и органов власти. Юристы смогли подготовиться к деловой программе форума в теплой неформальной обстановке, участвуя в интеллектуальной игре "Что? Где? Когда?", сопровождаемой дегустацией вин компании Высокий Берег. Вопросы игры затрагивали различные области искусства, науки, истории, но все они так или иначе касались права. Участники боролись за победу азартно и очень эмоционально. При схожем интеллектуальном и профессиональном уровне победа досталась самым удачливым.

Деловая программа форума началась 19 сентября 2020 в формате делового завтрака, на котором президент Адвокатской палаты Краснодарского края Андрей Чехов приветствовал собравшихся. «Коронавирус и бизнес: изменения в законодательстве, практики компаний и юридические последствия» - именно эта тема объединила участников делового завтрака, проходившего под модерацией Сергея Радченко, старшего юриста Адвокатского бюро «Юг».

Начальник юридической службы Московского метрополитена Андрей Лебедев поделился, как можно сохранить баланс между интересами бизнеса, сотрудников и норм законодательства после пандемии. Тимофей Носов, директор по юридическим вопросам и связям с государственными органами AZIMUT Hotels затронул тему о применимости норм форс-мажора к отсутствию денежных средств у должника, и что по этому поводу считает ВС РФ. Начальник управления активами НЛМК София Михеева рассказала, что происходило с арендой, как сказалась на бизнесе легализация арендных каникул и закон о расторжении договоров аренды. Сергей Гарифуллин, директор департамента управления персоналом Фонда «Талант и успех» образовательного центра «Сириус» задался вопросом, было ли сознательной трансформацией стратегии ведения бизнеса возвращение к «нормальным» трудовым отношениям после пандемии. А Евгения Черевец, Коллегия адвокатов «Регионсервис», заставила участников делового завтрака задуматься о перспективах онлайн-правосудия после карантина.

Первая сессия форума освещала вопросы банкротства под модераторством Сергея Ковалева из Коллегии адвокатов «Ковалев, Тугуши и партнеры». Владимир Бубликов, Юридическая компания «РКТ», рассказал, как изменились правила игры в банкротстве в 2020 году. Александр Федоров, начальник отдела по работе с несостоятельными должниками РУСАЛ обсудил с собравшимися какие последствия и риски несет для должников и кредиторов мораторий на возбуждение дел о банкротстве. Тему моратория продолжил Сергей Кислов из Коллегии адвокатов «Ковалев, Тугуши и партнеры», задавшийся вопросом о том, ждет ли бизнес банкротная эпидемия и справятся ли арбитражные суды с наплывом дел. Ирина Калинина, управляющий партнер Legal World, исследовала влияние изменений в законодательстве о банкротстве на семейное право.

Вторая сессия, модератором которой стал Денис Саушкин, управляющий партнер Адвокатского бюро «ЗКС», была посвящена уголовной отрасли права, собравшиеся обсудили вопросы, затрагивающие ответственность топ-менеджеров в условиях 2020 года. Сергей Водолагин, управляющий партнер «Вестсайд» сравнил современные тенденции юридической ответственности в России и за рубежом. Николай Родионов, старший юрист СИБУР поделился, как строится система внутреннего контроля глазами инхаус-юриста. А партнер MGP Lawyers Денис Быканов затронул ответственность директора за сделки с конфликтом интересов. Адвокатское бюро «РИ-консалтинг» в лице управляющего партнера Романа Воронина рассмотрело актуальную практику уголовной ответственности за уклонение от уплаты налогов. Геннадий Есаков, Адвокатское бюро «ЗКС», заострил внимание участников форума на новеллах об ужесточении уголовной ответственности и расширении полномочий ФАС.

Третья сессия Юридического форума юга России, ведущим которой выступил Алексей Отраднов, коммерческий директор Право.ру, прошла в полюбившемся формате World Cafe, в ходе которой все участники разделились на группы с модераторами. Общей темой сессии стала «Клиенты и консультанты в юрбизнесе: перезагрузка после пандемии». В рамках темы каждый стол обсуждал свой вопрос. Под модерацией Юрия Пустовита, управляющего партнера Адвокатского бюро «Юг», стол 1 говорил о том, какие практики и направления сейчас востребованы, в каких областях бизнесу нужна помощь консультанта. Стол 2 под управлением Юлии Сычевой, директора по юридическим вопросам Viacom, выяснял какой именно консультант нужен бизнесу, и как пандемия повлияла на отношения клиент-консультант. Стол 3 и Андрей Корельский, Адвокатское бюро КИАП, решали какие инструменты взаимодействия с инхаус-юристами были востребованы, а какие утратили актуальность. Стол 4 и управляющий партнер White Collar Strategy Иван Апатов поговорили о финансовой составляющей юридического бизнеса, есть ли место скидкам, как консультанты работают с дебиторской задолженностью. Гленн Коллини партнер из Dentons и стол 5 обсудили можно ли найти новых клиентов во время пандемии, есть ли клиентская лояльность и как взаимодействовать с компаниями из пострадавших отраслей.

Деловая часть форума завершилась торжественным ужином, а на следующий день форум продолжился в своей неформальной ипостаси. Юристы – люди активные, поэтому вот уже третий год подряд участники форума пробуют себя в экстремальном виде спорта – парусной регате. Каждый раз мероприятие несет элемент интриги, так как в большей части зависит от непредсказуемых погодных условий. Гонки проходили в довольно экстремальных погодных условиях в два этапа, по результатам была выбрана команда-победитель.

В целом XII Юридический форум юга России был очень эмоциональным: помимо теплой и солнечной локации- города Сочи- приехавшие оценили возможность пообщаться лицом к лицу без монитора, многие постоянные участники помимо интересной профессиональной программы с удовольствием встретили коллег, ставших друзьями. Юристы, попавшие на форум в первый раз, оценили возможность встречи с более опытными коллегами.

Краснинский районный суд Смоленской области, поддержанный Смоленским областным судом иск удовлетворил. Верховный суд по нашей жалобе судебные акты отменил и вернул дело на новое рассмотрение по подсудности – в Октябрьский районный суд г. Краснодара.

Повторно рассмотрев дело суд в иске отказал. Предприниматель решение своевременно не обжаловал, однако затем, ссылаясь на то, что он сидит в СИЗО в статусе обвиняемого по уголовному делу начал забрасывать суд ходатайствами о восстановлении срока на апелляционное обжалование. Октябрьский суд Краснодара ему в этом отказал. Краснодарский краевой суд определение об отказе оставил в силе. Однако Четвёртый кассационный суд посчитал, что доводы предпринимателя заслуживают внимания и вернул дело на новое рассмотрение в Октябрьский суд г. Краснодара.

15 июля 2020 года Октябрьский районный суд г. Краснодара в третий раз, через 4,5 года после начала дела, отказал истцу в восстановлении срока на подачу апелляционной жалобы.

Интересы клиента в Октябрьском районом суде г. Краснодара представляли управляющий партнёр Юрий Пустовит и старший юрист Сергей Радченко.

Юридическая компания - Адвокатское бюро "ЮГ"

Суды первой и апелляционной инстанции приняли по делу сторону администрации городского поселения, отказав в удовлетворении заявления. Однако, Арбитражный суд Северо-Кавказского округа в полной мере учёл наши доводы. Суд кассационной инстанции в вынесенном постановлении, в частности, указал, что изъятие земельного участка, является исключительной мерой, поэтому собственник такого участка должен быть заблаговременно предупрежден о допущенных нарушениях. Вместе с тем, наш Доверитель не привлекался к административной ответственности за неиспользование земельного участка по целевому назначению, не было в его адрес и обязательных предписаний, вынесенных в ходе государственного земельного надзора. Из имеющегося же мирового соглашения не следует, что за его неисполнение стороны предусмотрели ответственность в виде изъятия земельного участка. Суд указал, что постановление администрации принято в отсутствие оснований для изъятия земельного участка в порядке статьи 284 ГК РФ и нарушает интересы собственника участка в сфере предпринимательской деятельности. По результатам рассмотрения кассационной жалобы Арбитражный суд Северо-Кавказского округа отменил ранее принятые по делу судебные постановления, принял новый судебный акт, которым признал недействительным постановление администрации городского поселения об изъятии земельного участка.

Интересы Доверителя представлял юрист Захар Хребтов.

Клиент обратился в суд с иском к заводу, в котором просил признать решение совета директоров незаконным по трём основаниям: нарушен порядок созыва и проведения собрания (заявление о созыве поступило за день да даты заседания, председатель совета директоров совет не созывал), нарушен кворум (четыре члена совета из пяти), генеральным директором избрано лицо, которое ранее было признано решением суда банкротом.

Арбитражный суд Краснодарского края с нашими доводами согласился. Решением суда от 28.11.2019 иск клиента был удовлетворён, суд признал решение совета директоров незаконным и восстановил в должности прежнего генерального директора. Однако Пятнадцатый апелляционный суд решение суда отменил, в иске отказал по причине того, что клиент, как доверительный управляющий наследственной долей в уставном капитале общества, не имеет право обращаться с иском в суд. На это постановление мы подали кассационную жалобу в Арбитражный суд Северо-Кавказского округа, которая 16.06.2020 была удовлетворена: апелляционное постановление отменено, решение суда первой инстанции оставлено в силе.

Интересы клиента представлял старший юрист Сергей Радченко.

Решением Арбитражного суда Краснодарского края, оставленным без изменения постановлением Пятнадцатого арбитражного апелляционного суда, иск удовлетворён. Постановлением Арбитражного суда Северо-Кавказского округа принятые по делу судебные акты в части оставлены в силе, в остальной части судебные акты отменены, дело направлено на новое рассмотрение в суд первой инстанции.

На постановление окружного суда мы подали кассационную жалобу в Верховный суд РФ.

Определением Судебной коллегии по экономическим спорам Верховного суда РФ постановление Арбитражного суда Северо-Кавказского округа отменено, дело возвращено на новое рассмотрение в Арбитражный суд Северо-Кавказского округа. Данное дело является прецедентным для энергетической отрасли, поскольку в нём впервые в судебной практике обсуждаются ряд спорных вопросов, связанных с учётом потерь при определении объёма услуг по передаче электроэнергии.

Интересы доверителя в Верховном суде РФ представляли управляющий партнёр Адвокатского бюро «Юг» Юрий Пустовит и старший юрист Сергей Радченко.

Справочник включает юристов Адвокатского бюро «Юг» с 2016 года. В этом году рекомендации рейтинга Best Lawyers получили управляющий партнер Юрий Пустовит и старший юрист Сергей Радченко.

Юрий Пустовит рекомендован в трех отраслях права: Энергетика и природные ресурсы, Землепользование и зонирование, Разрешение судебных споров.

Сергей Радченко рекомендован в отрасли Разрешение судебных споров.

https://www.bestlawyers.com/current-edition/Russia

Октябрьский суд г. Новороссийска в иске отказал, но при этом установил обязанность клиента заплатить истцу 431 млн. руб. Краснодарский краевой суд решение оставил в силе.

Определением Судебной коллегии по гражданским делам Верховного суда РФ от 12.08.2019 по делу № 18-КГ19-45 апелляционное определение Краснодарского краевого суда отменено, дело возвращено на новое рассмотрение в Краснодарский краевой суд.

При новом рассмотрении дела апелляционным определением Краснодарского краевого суда от 3.12.2019 г. решение суда оставлено в силе, но при этом суд указал на то, что из мотивировочной части решение исключаются указания на наличие у клиента долга перед лицам, подконтрольными нашим оппонентам.

На это определение нашими оппонентами была подана кассационная жалоба. Определением Четвёртого кассационного суда от 19.05.2020 г. апелляционное определение было оставлено в силе.

Интересы клиента в Краснодарском краевом суде и Четвёртом кассационном суде представлял старший юрист Сергей Радченко.

Впоследствии этот проект был реализован инвестору.

В период срока действия выданного разрешения на строительство инвестор не смог построить жилой комплекс, после чего обратился за новым разрешением на строительство, в чем ему было отказано по причине ограничения на момент обращения высотности застройки в центральной части города Краснодара. Посчитав, что гражданско-правовой спор будет длительным и с высокой долей вероятности не приведет к удовлетворению требований инвестора, последний решил, что действия продавца инвестиционного проекта подпадают под состав уголовного преступления, и обратился в правоохранительные органы с заявлением о совершении преступления, после чего было возбуждено уголовное дело. Постановления о возбуждении уголовных дел неоднократно отменялись Генеральной прокуратурой Российской Федерации, однако, следствием настойчиво продолжались выноситься новые постановления о возбуждении уголовных дел с иными квалифицирующими признаками.

Чтобы поставить точку в этом деле, прекратить нарушение конституционных прав доверителя и добиться правовой определенности, адвокатами Адвокатского бюро «Юг» была подготовлена и подана жалоба в порядке ст. 125 УПК РФ, которая была удовлетворена судом в полном объеме. Суд согласился с доводами адвокатов, что отношения между сторонами лежат в плоскости гражданско-правового спора и не могут быть квалифицированы в качестве преступления, и признал незаконным постановление о возбуждении уголовного дела.

Интересы доверителя представлял управляющий партнер Юрий Пустовит.

Исследование, длящееся год, включает в себя интервью с теми, кто активно работает на рынке - в основном с клиентами и другими юристами, а также оценку проделанной в последнее время работы.

В региональном российском рейтинге Chambers Europe 2020 упомянуто 27 юридических компаний, расположенных на территории России, кроме Москвы. Рейтинг поделен по отраслям права, каждый отраслевой раздел поделен на группы по убыванию результатов, самые лучшие показатели у компаний первой группы. Помимо рейтинга компаний есть персональный рейтинг юристов.

Адвокатское бюро «Юг» продолжает занимать позицию в группе 1 отрасли Предпринимательское право.

Заключение рейтинга о том, чем знаменита команда Адвокатского бюро «Юг»: авторитетная юридическая фирма, расположенная в Краснодаре, действующая в интересах крупных отечественных и зарубежных компаний, участвующих в коммерческих, корпоративных и акционерных спорах на юге России. Регулярно представляет интересы энергетических, строительных и промышленных корпораций в договорах поставки, спорах о недвижимости и возмещении убытков. Административные споры, включая налоговые споры, являются еще одной областью экспертизы.

Сильной стороной клиенты считают инициативный подход фирмы к проектам. Один из восторженных отзывов респондента: "Они приходят ко мне только с решениями, а не с проблемами."

Еще один источник отмечает прагматическую проницательность ABY: "Мне нравится, что они всегда дают честную оценку перспективам, так что мы всегда знаем, чего ожидать."

В рейтинг юристов вошли управляющий партнер Адвокатского бюро «Юг» Юрий Пустовит (группа 1) и старший юрист Сергей Радченко (группа 2).

Мнению опрошенных о Юрие Пустовите: «Его прагматичный подход ориентирован на результат»: «быстро реагирует на наши запросы и может найти эффективные решения».

Сергей Радченко консультирует по широкому спектру коммерческих споров и получает высокую оценку за свой аналитический подход к делам. Источники описывают его как «невероятного аналитика, великого человека и ученого», а также «очень внимательного к деталям; он может найти то, что другие упускают.»

Ассоциация европейского бизнеса (АЕБ) – основное представительство иностранных инвесторов в России, созданное в 1995 году, является независимой некоммерческой организацией, объединяющей более 500 компаний, работающих в России. АЕБ включает в себя 65 комитетов, подкомитетов и рабочих групп, которые занимаются лоббированием широкого спектра вопросов в различных областях бизнеса. Данные комитеты тесно сотрудничают с европейскими и российскими властями, активно взаимодействуя с последними в рамках оценки регулирующего воздействия.

Адвокатское бюро «Юг» является членом АЕБ с 2003 года, с момента создания Южного регионального комитета со штаб-квартирой в г. Краснодаре, а управляющий партнер АБ «Юг» Юрий Пустовит входит в состав координационной группы Южного регионального комитета АЕБ в России около 10 лет подряд.

Местом проведения не случайно была выбрана самая масштабная площадка Екатеринбурга - Конгресс-Центр МВЦ «Екатеринбург-ЭКСПО»- в этом году «Ковалевские чтения» приняли порядка 1200 человек из 21 страны. Среди спикеров и почетных гостей собралась плеяда практикующих юристов, научных и государственных деятелей, судей разных стран, историков и философов.

Начало первого дня деловой программы было ознаменовано подписанием соглашения о сотрудничестве между Федеральной палатой адвокатов Российской Федерации и РОО «Союз криминалистов и криминологов».

Основной доклад: «Примирение в уголовном праве: неиспользованный потенциал» был дополнен и раскрыт пленарной сессией «Примирение в праве: компромисс или уступка?»

Совместная Пленарная сессия Международной Ассоциации Криминологии (ISC) и Международного форума «Преступность и уголовное право в эпоху глобализации» (IFCCLGE), прошедшая 13 февраля была посвящена обсуждению вопросов по борьбе с международной преступностью. Собравшиеся заключили, что это является одним из приоритетных направлений всех без исключения государств. При этом предмет исследования в международной криминологии выходит за рамки юриспруденции и захватывает различные науки, не связанные с правом. С целью выстраивания соответствующих инструментов для примирения, любому государству необходимо понимать, каковы причины преступности, а также какую форму преступность приобретет в скором времени, какой был есть и будет преступник.

Первый рабочий день конференции завершился Арбитражной конференцией: «Арбитражное решение: добровольное или принудительное исполнение». Где участники обсудили в каких ситуациях стороны исполняют арбитражное решение добровольно и на что они ориентируются; способствует ли судебная практика добровольному или принудительному исполнению решения; популярно ли добровольное исполнение решения в других странах; как добровольное исполнение решения влияет на развитие бизнеса в целом и конкретные отношения сторон в частности?

14 февраля второй рабочий день конференции стартовал с параллельных панельных дискуссий: «Цена государственного прощения: ответственность или возмещение ущерба?», «Медиативный потенциал в уголовном праве и процессе, а также при исполнении наказания» и «Адвокат, нотариус, арбитр и судебный примиритель: эффективные техники, стратегии и компетенции», в которой принял участие управляющий партнер Адвокатского бюро «Юг» Юрий Пустовит. В своем выступлении «Участие адвоката в примирении сторон судебного спора» Ю. Пустовит рассказал, как выглядит ситуация с примирением сторон на практике. По данным за первое полугодие 2019 года ничтожно мал процент рассмотренных дел, закончившихся заключением мирового соглашения. На это есть несколько причин: во-первых, судиться в России – недорого и быстро, во-вторых, этого не всегда хотят клиенты, так как в большинстве случаев, полагают свои требования законными, а предложение мира воспринимают проявлением слабости, в-третьих, этого не всегда хотят адвокаты, так как не обладают достаточными знаниями специфики бизнеса клиента, не считают примирение выгодным с точки зрения гонорара и маркетинга - хождение в суд по инстанциям стоит дороже переговоров, а победа в суде более привлекательна в качестве информационного повода для сайта и социальных сетей.

После обеденного перерыва конференция продолжила свою работу в формате панельных дискуссий состоялось еще три параллельных сессии «Частная жизнь: пределы допустимого вмешательства государства»; «Древние обычаи примирения сегодня» и «Косвенные и коллективные иски по корпоративным спорам. Особенности примирения».

В рамках второго рабочего дня «Ковалевских чтений» прошло Выездное заседание Совета Федеральной палаты адвокатов Российской Федерации.

А завершилась конференция тремя параллельными панельными дискуссиями: «Что ждет практика от юридического образования?»; «Санкции: в поисках мира» и «Право недвижимости: граница между частным и публичным интересом». Старший юрист Адвокатского бюро «Юг» к.ю.н. Сергей Радченко в панельной дискуссии по недвижимости объяснил, как правильно разграничить публичные и частные интересы в правовом регулировании самовольного строительства. Нормы о самовольном строительстве внутренне противоречивы: с одной стороны, создание самовольной постройки – это публичное правонарушение, с другой стороны – это один из законных способов приобретения права собственности.

Правильно разграничить публичные и частные интересы в области самовольного строительства можно только при условии, если будут преодолены две трудности: теоретическая и практическая. Теоретическая трудность состоит в том, чтобы определить: самовольная постройка – это вещь или не вещь? Практическая: данное конкретное сооружение - это недвижимость или нет?

Статья 222 ГК пережила три крупные реформы, но для правильного баланса публичных и частных интересов надо добавить ряд норм, которых в проекте нет: аналог эстоппеля в ГК - административный эстоппель; при встречных исках о сносе и о признании права один из них обязательно должен быть удовлетворён.