Arbitration courtsthe Supreme Arbitration Court has refused the claim to the Perm commercial bank “ the Dawn of Ural Mountains “ to the Central bank of Russia, Central Bank Central administrative board on the Perm area and the Volgograd joint-stock commercial bank “ the Dawn “. The claimant asked to make change to the register of banks - to exclude from the register the Volgograd bank “ the Dawn “ and to appropriate the name “ the Dawn “ to the claimant.
bank - the claimant was formed in 1988 under the name “ Cooperative bank ` the Dawn ` “. On September, 26th, 1990 it was re-registered and the Perm trade-union commercial bank began to be called. At the moment of registration of the charter of the Volgograd bank “ the Dawn “ (respondent) of banks with the similar name it has not been registered. Already after registration Volgograd “ the Dawn “ the Perm trade-union commercial bank has again wished to become “ the Dawn “ But the Central Bank has refused to it registration under this name, as one bank “ the Dawn “ has already been registered. The trade-union commercial bank had to be registered “ the Dawn of Ural Mountains “.
the Claimant (“ the Dawn of Ural Mountains “) At session asserted that “ the verbal image ` the Dawn ` is our priority “ (as this bank in 1988 was “ the Dawn “ when present “ the Dawn “ still at all was not). According to the representative of the claimant, “ the Dawn “ uses a trade mark “ the Dawn of Ural Mountains “ in the advertising, rendering similar services.
however the court recognised that “ the Dawn “ uses only the name, instead of another`s trade mark. The court has explained to the claimant that the priority in use of the name of bank in a trade mark is given to the one who earlier under this name was registered (in this case - to bank - to the respondent). The board under the chairmanship of Aleksandry Kozlovoj has refused the claim to bank “ the Dawn of Ural Mountains “.
consideration of the claim of the Chelyabinsk management of the regional innovative program " Is postponed till March, 22nd; Zolmiks “ To Republican innovative fund, the government of Russia, the State Property Committee, the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Justice of Russia on 30,298 million rbl.
According to the claimant, respondents according to the governmental order should finance management of the regional program “ Zolmiks “ (“ Zoloshlak and microspheres “), however did not do it. The claimant has been compelled to take the credit for payment of the employees. Now the management should return the credit and percent on it, and collects “ from the state losses in connection with not appropriate execution by respondents of the duties “.
Representatives likvidkoma Republican innovative fund do not recognise the claim as according to typical position about management of the program the state does not answer under its obligations. On court it was found out that respondents have received the statement of claim with the smaller claim sum, than designated in the petition (21,455 million rbl.) . The judicial board did not manage to specify, how many money asks from the state the claimant, as representatives “ Zolmiksa “ on session were not, from - for what it and has been postponed till March, 22nd.
the cassation board of the Moscow arbitration court has upheld a judgement of the first instance under the claim of Office of Public Prosecutor of Moscow to hotel “ the Russian “ (were “ Academic “) About a recognition of void its constituent documents.
the claim has been submitted because since February, 1992 the hotel became the independent enterprise that did not suit the Academy of Sciences of Russia considering with its property. The court of the first instance has satisfied the claim of Office of Public Prosecutor, having referred to the decree of the president of Russia “ About the organisation of the Russian Academy of Sciences “ from November, 21st, 1991 on which the Academy admitted the proprietor of property of Academy of Sciences of the USSR (including hotels).
However, according to the representative “ Russians “ legality of this decree will be shortly challenged in the Constitutional court of Russia. To challenge the decree association of trade unions " gathers; Sotsprof “.
consideration of the claim Soviet - the Austrian enterprise " Is postponed for April, 7th; Volmag “ to firm “ vneshkabel “ on DM180 thousand
Between the parties the contract on which the claimant has put " has been concluded; vneshkabelju “ enamel - wires for the claim sum. However payments of the goods and has not followed.
during session the representative “ vneshkabelja “ asserted that this transaction passed in frameworks of the state plan: the minelektronprom USSR has charged “ vneshkabelju “ to buy abroad enamel - a wire for the ministry enterprises. However, under statements of representatives “ vneshkabelja “ their firm has met “ Volmagu “ (to stimulate the manufacturer) and has bought a wire from it, instead of abroad. The status of the claimant as joint venture has given the chance to conclude the given contract as calculations in currency between the Russian enterprises have been forbidden.
“ vneshkabel “ asserts that does not bear responsibility for purchase payment, as he should pay not from the settlement account but only to authorise for write-off of budget money from the special account in “ Foreign trade and investment bank “. But when time has approached to pay, this account has been already frozen.
in court the representative “ vneshkabelja “ asked to involve as the co-defendant of assignee Minelektronproma of the USSR - the Russian state corporation “ Electronics “. The court has defined to involve corporation “ Electronics “ and “ Foreign trade and investment bank “ - but as the third parties.
the claim of the Russian state insurance company to association " is partially satisfied; Intermak “ on 330 thousand rbl. - for goods short shipment. After verification of calculations the sum has decreased to 260 thousand rbl. For this sum the claim and is satisfied.
the arbitration court of St.-Petersburg and area has satisfied the claim of individual private enterprise “ Vega “ (Volkhov) to the rent enterprise “ the Volkhov furniture factory “ and to co-operative society “ Desna “ on 8 million rbl.
on October, 6th, 1992 the respondent has concluded with “ Vegoj “ The contract on delivery 114 t granulated sugar. “ Vega “ has translated an advance payment at a rate of 8 million rbl. the Goods has not been put. Co-operative society “ Desna “ it is involved in business in quality of the second respondent on the ground that “ the Volkhov furniture factory “ in turn bought sugar at “ gums “ which money has been actually transmited. The court has collected the sum of the claim with “ gums “.
the joint-stock company claim " Is satisfied; Dionis “ to the special it is repair - to building management of Smolninsky area and small private enterprise “ the Scythian “ about eviction. On April, 3rd, 1992 the head of administration of Smolninsky area has disposed to transfer “ Dionisu “ the premise the area 177 ì2 in which the special settled down is repair - building management of Smolninsky area.
before eviction it was found out that on November, 14th, 1991 RSU has concluded with “ the Scythian “ The contract on joint activity, on which “ the Scythian “ equipped in this premise shop. The claim is satisfied, as at RSU there were no lawful bases to dispose of this premise.
it is refused the claim of Glavsnaba of the mayoralty of St.-Petersburg to musoropererabatyvajushchemu to factory #2 and to production association Ukrelektroapparat on 38 thousand rbl. of the Party have concluded the contract on equipment delivery. On the journey the goods were lost, but after a claim presentation suddenly were; the parties have come to the agreement and the claim has been refused.