determination of jurisdiction

[Андрей Захаров]

Dear colleagues))) I ask you to participate in the discussion of the subject-jurisdiction of the consideration of claims for compensation for material time caused by an explosion in a residential building (non-residential premises were damaged). The essence of this is an individual entrepreneur, being the owner of a number of non-residential premises located on the first floor of a residential building, I decided to turn to the court with a question about compensation for material time caused by an explosion that occurred as a result of an accumulation of gas (non-domestic), due to the fact that, during repair work in the basement of this building, ventilation was laid down by the builders system.Municipal workers who were obliged to monitor the serviceability of the ventilation system showed negligence, not having carried out appropriate inspections of the systems after the construction work was carried out. The inspection carried out by the police officers revealed that the explosion, as a result of which the plaintiff’s property was damaged, occurred precisely as a result of the gasification of the basement. The persons guilty of causing material harm are LLC, OJSC. The claimant entrepreneur himself acquired this property as an individual (according to the existing rule, the certificate of ownership is executed as an individual, although the purchase agreement -sales for the purchase of this property was formalized by him as an IP) The plaintiff leases these premises for trading activities to other legal entities and IP. There are no contractual obligations between the plaintiff and potential defendants. The essence of the question is what court (the Arbitration Court or the JMA) is authorized to consider this dispute. The sub-question of this issue is that if there were contractual obligations between the plaintiff and the defendants related to the implementation of economic activities, the case is subordinate to the Arbitration Court .. . However, in this case, no contractual obligations exist between the plaintiff and the defendant ... Is it possible that this dispute is to be considered in the JMA ... If so, on the basis of which, if not, there is also a possible justification ...

 

[Борис Вячеславович]

the purchase and sale agreement was drawn up as with an IP, if today the plaintiff has an IP status, then this is the jurisdiction of the Arbitration.

 

[Частный детектив Нижний Новгород]

No, only Arbitration. Since the harm was caused whether the contractual relationship was independent or not, the legal entity is the person with the legal procedural status of the legal entity.

 

[Лубянка]

I agree with Vladimir! The arbitral tribunal considers this kind of case. The question is about recovering from a legal entity a certain amount of money for material damage caused.

 

[Андрей Захаров]

It also seemed to me that everything was simple ... Now, if the authorities (state, local self-government) showed negligence -without questions, Arbitration ... And here, a little different ... The very fact that both the plaintiff and the defendants are so-called "business entities" is not the main sign of determining the jurisdiction of the dispute ... And then there is the lack of direct contractual obligations ... I looked at judicial practice, where there are direct contracts, without question, Arbitration ... And where no contracts, in the arbitration practice I did not find ... Maybe I was looking badly ...

 

[Детективное агентство Кострома]

Andrew, do not bother. The damage is caused to physical. person, and the dispute will not be economic and not associated with entrepreneurial activity. The main point is confirmation that the guilty entities used the premises. The court of general jurisdiction will accept for consideration, even if it decides not to consider it, it is reasonably obliged to paint on what grounds.

 

[Андрей Захаров]

Andrew, do not bother. The damage is caused to physical. person, and the dispute will not be economic and not associated with entrepreneurial activity. The main point is confirmation that the guilty entities used the premises. The court of general jurisdiction will accept for consideration, even if it decides not to consider it, it is reasonably obliged to paint on what grounds.

Good day))) Here, on the issue of using the premises, the situation is as follows: the defendants did not use the premises belonging to the plaintiff (if they had, they would have had a contractual relationship, which is the jurisdiction of the Arbitration Court). as a result, there was a gas contamination of the premises and, as a result, an explosion that caused harm to the plaintiff. The defendants did not have any contracts with the plaintiff.

 

[Адвокат]

Andrei, is it principally for you to appeal to the Arbitration Court?
When filing a lawsuit in a court of general jurisdiction, the state duty will be lower.
Such a claim can be safely filed with a court of general jurisdiction.
The plaintiff can file a lawsuit as a private person and include in the lawsuit claims regarding lost profits (if he can and wants to prove its size).

 

[Андрей Захаров]

Andrei, is it principally for you to appeal to the Arbitration Court?
When filing a lawsuit in a court of general jurisdiction, the state duty will be lower.
Such a claim can be safely filed with a court of general jurisdiction.
The plaintiff can file a lawsuit as a private person and include in the lawsuit claims regarding lost profits (if he can and wants to prove its size).

Good day, dear colleague))) Yes, no, the question is not fundamental. I just try to avoid "blunders" when doing work, especially with the determination of jurisdiction ... I don’t correctly submit extra questions from the client ... They can leave without consideration, return ... I try to do everything right ... Without "mistakes" ... Therefore, I try to figure it out ... You have to pay for "maintaining authority" -to understand the problem in detail