Column “ Arbitration courts “the Supreme Arbitration Court has refused the claim to justice department of the Ulyanovsk region, demanding to nullify the decision of Tsilninsky district executive committee on transfer of a building of the former district committee of the CPSU to Office of Public Prosecutor and school. The justice department insisted on transfer of a disputable party private residence to Exclusively Tsilninsky regional court as it was recommended by Boris Yeltsin`s decree from September, 30th, 1991 “ About urgent measures on improvement of a work of the courts “. The Arbitration court recognised that this decree has only recommendatory character.
on January, 4th, 1992 the executive committee of Tsilninsky regional council of deputies has published the order “ About a building Tsilninsky RK the CPSU “ according to which in a building have been placed Office of Public Prosecutor and More - Nagatkinsky high school. After the regional society of invalids and committee on youth affairs there have driven. All these organisations have been involved by respondents under the claim of justice department of the Ulyanovsk region, demanding to nullify the mentioned order of district executive committee and to transfer a disputable structure to balance to the claimant.
the Ulyanovsk arbitration court in July, 1993 has satisfied the claim. However this decision has been protested by the assistant to General public prosecutor Sabirom Kehlerovym. He has informed that under the decree of the president of Russia from August, 25th, 1991 “ About property of the CPSU and KP RSFSR “ the right of the order the party property allocates local enforcement authorities. Hence, the Tsilninsky executive committee operated lawfully. As to Boris Yeltsin`s order from September, 30th, 1991 about transfer of buildings of the CPSU to courts (to which the claimant refers), it, according to the State Office of Public Prosecutor, “ is not the document of direct action and has only recommendatory character “. G - n Kehlerov has noticed in the protest that two-storeyed building RK the CPSU is too great for Tsilninsky regional court.
the supervising board of the Supreme Arbitration Court (chairman Nadezhda Vyshnjak) has agreed with the protest and has rejected the claim. The board has considered that the justice department has not the right to sue at all in interests of district court.
the Moscow arbitration court has satisfied the claim commercial the Resource - bank to commercial the Draft - on 971 million rbl. the Respondent has not returned to bank the Resource - to bank 200 - the million loan and percent on it. For it the court has collected about the Draft - bank in favour of the claimant the sum, more than four times exceeding the credit received by the debtor.
in the end of November, 1993 the respondent has received from the Resource - bank the credit in 200 million rbl. for three months under 215 % annual. Under treaty provisions and the additional agreement to it the interest rate under the loan increased every month by 5 %, and at delay of return of the credit to the borrower 4 % from an amount of debt (consisting of the loan and percent on it) were charged every day.
the Draft - the bank has not returned the credit in time, having declared that is in a heavy financial position. The claim sum to the debtor has developed of the credit, percent on it (106 million rbl.) and the raised percent for untimely return of the loan (665 million rbl.) . The court has considered requirements the Resource - bank proved and has satisfied the claim.
the Moscow arbitration court has satisfied the claim commercial the Merchant - bank to commercial Mosbarterbanku on 487,5 million rbl. the Respondent guaranteed return 150 - the million credit firm “ Ateks - To “ which, under data the Merchant - bank, has disappeared with credit money. The court has collected the loan and percent on it from bank - the guarantor.
in October, 1993 the Merchant - the bank has given to closed joint-stock company “ Ateks - To “ the credit in 150 million rbl. for a month under 240 % of annual manufactured goods for purchase. Return of the loan and percent on it (including raised, provided at delay of return of a debt) guaranteed Mosbarterbank. When there has come term of repayment of a debt, the Merchant - bank began to search for the borrower to the legal address specified in the credit contract. But it was found out that the address “ lime “ (Specified number of the house does not exist).
Mosbarterbank has refused to carry out of obligations of the guarantor, having declared that “ does not wish to pay off for swindlers “. However the court has forced the guarantor to make it, having collected from it the loan received by joint-stock company “ Ateks - To “ and percent on it (487,5 million rbl.).