Topic 5. LEGAL EXPENSES

Topic 4. PROCEDURAL TERMS

Problem #70 83

Determine the types of deadlines and the consequences of their expiration:

1) terms of preparation and consideration of civil cases;

2) the term for correcting the shortcomings of the statement of claim;

3) deadlines for the execution of court orders;

4) deadlines for submission of evidence;

5) the term for preparing the minutes of the court session;

6) the deadline for submitting comments on the minutes of the court session;

7) time limits for appealing court decisions (rulings);

8) deadlines for the execution of a court decision.

Problem #71 84

What is the time frame for consideration of the case if claims are combined in one proceeding, of which for some the law establishes a reduced, and for others the general period for consideration (for example, on establishing paternity and on the recovery of alimony)?

Problem #72 85

The preparation of a civil case for compensation for damage caused by damage to property was carried out by the judge within a month after the court accepted the statement of claim for proceedings. The court ruled in the case three months later.

What violations were committed by the court? What are the consequences of these violations?

Problem #73 86

By a court decision, Suvorov was denied a claim for reinstatement at work. Suvorov filed a cassation appeal within one month after the decision was made. The judge refused to accept the cassation appeal, citing the fact that the deadline stipulated by law had been missed. Suvorov claimed that he missed the deadline because he received a copy of the court decision three weeks after it was issued.

What should be done in this situation?

Problem #74 87

On April 10, the court ruled to satisfy Mokhov’s claim against Vadimov for the recovery of the debt. On May 10, the defendant sent a complaint against the decision by mail to the court, which was received by the court on May 15.

The judge returned the complaint due to missing the statutory deadline for appealing the decision.

Did the judge do the right thing? What is the procedure for calculating the procedural period?

Problem #75 88

26 On December 3, 2013, the court ruled to dismiss Golubkova’s claim against Trusov to recognize ownership of the residential building. On January 9, 2014, Golubkova asked the judge to accept a complaint against the court decision. The judge refused to accept the complaint, indicating that the deadline for filing a complaint expired on Friday, January 3, since January 4 and 5 (Saturday and Sunday) are non-working days in the court.

Did the judge do the right thing?

Problem #76 89

On January 20, the court ruled to recover from Nosov in favor of Mironov the amount of money under the lease agreement. On January 23, Nosov died without having time to file an appeal. On February 12, a copy of Nosov’s death certificate was presented to the court, and the court suspended the proceedings.

Nosov’s son, having received a certificate of the right to inheritance, went to court on July 30 with a complaint against the court decision of January 20. The judge did not accept returned the appeal, pointing out that the appeal period expired on February 22, March 12.

Are the actions of the judge correct?

Problem #77 90

What reasons for missing the deadline for filing an appeal (cassation, supervisory) complaint can the court consider valid:

1) the defendant was unable to file a complaint because he was abroad;

2) the chief accountant of the organization, whose duties included filing a complaint, missed the deadline due to difficult family circumstances (prolonged serious illness and death of her husband), and the position of a legal adviser in the staff of the organization is not provided;

3) the dispute belongs to a complex category of cases that require special knowledge, and therefore it took a long time to prepare and send a reasoned complaint;

4) a copy of the court decision was received one month after its issuance, and the plaintiff filed a complaint with the court three months after receiving a copy of the court decision;

5) the parties missed the deadline for filing a supervisory appeal, because they did not know about the changes made to the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation on the procedure for applying to the supervisory court and about the reduction of the specified period.

Problem #78 91

Are there any violations of procedural deadlines in the following cases:

1) the case on reinstatement was considered on the next day after its initiation;

2) the defendant filed an application for the annulment of the decision in absentia on the fifteenth day after its issuance;

3) the response to the statement of claim was submitted by the defendant to the court session;

4) a court order for the recovery of wages was issued to the claimant a month after he applied to the court with a corresponding application;

5) the summons and a copy of the statement of claim were sent to the defendant three days before the upcoming court session;

6) with an application for an additional decision regarding the recovery of court costs, the plaintiff applied to the court two months after the main decision was made;

7) a copy of the decision in absentia was sent to the defendant on the next day after its issuance.

Problem #92

Mudrova and Mudrova in February 2011 applied to the Traktorozavodsky District Court of Chelyabinsk with an application for compensation for violation of the right to legal proceedings within a reasonable time, pointing out the lengthy consideration by the court of their claims against Suetin to bring the dwelling to its original state.

In their application, they indicated that they applied to the Traktorozavodskiy District Court of Chelyabinsk on 11 January 2010. The court opened the civil case on 16 January 2010. On February 15, 2010, the plaintiffs were summoned to court in order to prepare the case for trial. Due to the absence of the plaintiffs, the call was repeated on February 27. On that day, the judge issued requests to the plaintiffs to the registry office and to the notary and attracted a third party to participate in the case. The court then scheduled a preliminary hearing for 23 March 2010 and the main hearing for 8 April 2010. As a result of consideration of the case on April 8, 2010, the court decided to partially satisfy the claims. The decision entered into force on June 24, 2010.

Should this requirement be satisfied?

Problem #93

By the verdict of the Bryansk Regional Court of December 6, 2010, Syryany was sentenced on cumulative crimes to 12 years in prison and a fine of 60,000 rubles to be served in a strict regime correctional colony. The cassation decision of the Judicial Collegium for Criminal Cases of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of June 1, 2011 upheld the verdict.

Syryany applied to the court to award compensation for violation of the right to legal proceedings within a reasonable time in the amount of 150 thousand rubles. In support of the stated requirement, he indicated that he was brought to criminal responsibility on January 17, 2008, and the last court order was issued on June 1, 2011.

This period is a significant period of criminal prosecution, while he is not responsible for any of the resulting delays in the proceedings, since he did not evade the production of investigative and judicial actions, did not create obstacles to the preliminary investigation bodies and the court, did not abuse his procedural rights. The circumstance that influenced the duration of the proceedings was the delay in the consideration of the case during the preliminary investigation and in court. Consideration of the case for such a long period caused him moral suffering, he was in a state of uncertainty about his fate, all this time he was kept in custody in a pre-trial detention center, which amounted to one third of the sentence he was supposed to serve in a colony, in connection with than he lost the right to long visits with his wife and young son.

Which court has jurisdiction over this application? Is the stated requirement subject to satisfaction?

Problem 94

The total duration of the consideration of the civil case on the claim of Klimov for the restoration of the missed deadline for accepting the inheritance in the Sovetsky District Court of Rostov-on-Don was 7 years. Klimov filed a lawsuit against the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation to award compensation for violating the right to legal proceedings within a reasonable time due to the fact that.

Which court has jurisdiction over this application? Is the stated requirement subject to satisfaction?

Problem 95

The criminal case against Mitin was initiated on January 27, 2001. The case was sent to court on March 3, 2003, after which it was returned to the prosecutor 8 times for additional investigation. The case was brought to court on February 3, 2010, the verdict in the case was delivered by the St. Petersburg City Court on May 14, 2012, and entered into force on August 9, 2012.

The total duration of legal proceedings in the criminal case was 11 years and 5 months. The case was distinguished by a certain complexity, a large volume (52 volumes), and a multi-episode character. In the case, 12 people were involved as defendants, who were charged with committing crimes of varying severity (murder, kidnapping, theft, fraud, etc.). 13 people were recognized as victims, 74 people were interrogated as witnesses, many different examinations were carried out in the case.

Mitin applied to the court for compensation for violation of the right to legal proceedings within a reasonable time in the amount of 1,500,000 rubles, as well as reimbursement of court costs in the amount of 250,000 rubles.

Which court has jurisdiction over this application? Is the stated requirement subject to satisfaction?

Topic 5. LEGAL EXPENSES

Problem #79 96

Determine the price of the claim, the amount of the state fee and from whom it must be collected in the following cases:

1) on the claim of Galkina to Galkin for the recovery of alimony for her son. The defendant receives a salary of 16,000 rubles. per month;

2) on the claim of Vlasov against Vlasova on reducing the amount of alimony collected by 4,500 rubles;

3) on the suit of Romanov against Romanova for divorce and division of property valued at 200,000 rubles;

4) on a claim for recognition of ownership of a country house worth 3,850,000 rubles;

5) on a claim for the recovery of wages in the amount of 78,000 rubles. The claim was partially satisfied in the amount of 37,000 rubles;

6) on the claim of the prosecutor for compensation for damage caused to the property of a pensioner, in the amount of 32,000 rubles. The claim is satisfied;

7) according to Galkina’s statement about the announcement of Galkin’s husband, he died;

8) on Petrunin’s complaint about the refusal to leave the Russian Federation;

9) on Laptev’s cassation appeal against the court’s decision to recover from him 13,000 rubles. in favor of Zharov.

Problem #80 97

Determine the price of the claim, the amount of the state fee and from whom it must be collected in the following cases:

1) on the claim of Somova against Somov for the recovery of alimony for three children, the court ruled to recover the debt in the amount of 23,000 rubles. and a monthly recovery of 50% of all types of earnings from the defendant until the children reach the age of majority. The defendant’s earnings are 12,000 rubles. per month. The defendant appealed against the decision in terms of debt collection;

2) on the claim of Antipova to Antipov for divorce and for the division of jointly acquired property worth 350,000 rubles.

Antipov filed a counterclaim to declare the marriage invalid;

3) on the lawsuit of Gorbunov against Matveev for the release of half of the house from arrest. The cost of the house is 3,000,000 rubles;

4) on the claim of Krotov against Mashpribor LLC for the recovery of periodic payments in the amount of 14,000 rubles. within a year in compensation for the damage caused by the injury. The court satisfied the claim in part, recovering in favor of Krotov 10,000 rubles each. monthly. Both parties appealed against the decision: the plaintiff considers it wrong to deny part of the claim; the defendant believes unfounded partial satisfaction of the claim;

5) on the claim of Gavrilov against Kukushkin for the recovery of a debt in the amount of 90,000 rubles. Kukushkin filed a counterclaim for the recovery of property transferred to Gavrilov for temporary use, worth 98,000 rubles. The court ruled to dismiss Gavrilov’s claim and recover from him in favor of Kukushkin 70,000 rubles. Both parties appealed the decision;

6) at the request of Gromov for the reissuance of a copy of the court decision;

7) on Sergeev’s cassation appeal against the court’s decision to recover periodic payments from him in compensation for harm caused to health in the amount of 4,500 rubles;

8) at the suit of the owner of the country house Grigoriev against the tenant Kozlov for eviction and collection of debt under a rental agreement in the amount of 87,000 rubles. During the trial, Grigoriev increased his claims to 102,000 rubles, and the defendant filed a counterclaim against him for the recovery of 65,000 rubles spent on home repairs. The court decision satisfied Grigoriev’s claim for the eviction of Kozlov. At the same time, the court exacted 40,000 rubles from Grigoriev in favor of Kozlov. Both parties appealed the decision, believing it was wrong.

Problem #81 98

Limonov was denied a claim for recognition of ownership of a car worth 750,000 rubles. After the court decision entered into force, Limonov found out that the actual cost of the car was 470,000 rubles. In this regard, he turned to his lawyer with a request to clarify whether it is possible to return the overpaid state fee to him.

What explanation should be given in this case?

Problem #82 99

Morozov filed a lawsuit for compensation for damage caused to the car as a result of an accident, and asked the court to defer payment of the state fee. The court granted the plaintiff’s motion. During the trial, Morozov came to the conclusion that his claims were unfounded and abandoned the claim until he paid the state fee.

To whom and in what order should the costs of paying the state fee be charged in this situation?

Problem #83 100

Panov abandoned the claim for the recovery of 37,000 rubles from Zotov, due to the fact that the debt to Zotov was returned. The court accepted the plaintiff’s refusal of the claim and terminated the proceedings.

Is the plaintiff entitled to demand the return of the state fee?

Problem #84 101

During the trial of the case on the division of jointly acquired property, the former spouses of the Somovs entered into an amicable agreement, according to which property worth 500,000 rubles. was equally divided among the parties.

How should the issue of distribution between the parties of court costs in the case be resolved?

Problem #85 102

Gromov filed a lawsuit to recover from Frolov the property transferred for storage. During the trial, Frolov agreed to return the property and recognized the claim, but asked the court not to recover from him the state fee paid by the plaintiff. The plaintiff agreed with the defendant’s motion.

Is there a state duty to be collected from the defendant?

Be First to Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.