Krasnodar office of the global clothing retail company contacted ABY having three binding district court’s decisions. Every time the consumers-plaintiffs implemented the same scheme: to buy jeans and a shirt in a store and immediately discover defects of the goods such as unstable fabric paint. Moreover, the purchased clothing painted interior of the consumers’ cars. Thus, along with claims on recovery costs of the goods, penalties and fines, the plaintiffs requested to recover damages, and it is a significant sums of money. Total recovery claims of all cases are around one million rubles.
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.Back