JULY 2019

We successfully represented a client (defendant) in a civil case on damage to professional reputation, refutation of disseminated incorrect information and damage compensation. Having considered the case the court noted inter alia in its procedural decision that a person, whose honour and dignity were harmed by the dissemination of untrue data, may defend his/her rights by asking to order a responsible person to negate such information; to declare by a court ruling that such information misrepresents reality; order the culpable person to pay suffered material and/or non-material damage. In accordance with Part 2 of Article 2.24 of the Civil Code, where erroneous data is publicised by a mass medium, an obligation of prior implementation of an out-of-court settlement procedure arises. The aforementioned provision establishes the so-called right of replication, where a person who is of the opinion that erroneous data misrepresenting reality and abasing honour and dignity of the person has been spread must first address the mass medium demanding to publish the said refutation or make it public in some other way within a two weeks’ time; if the mass medium refuses to do that, the person obtains the right to address the court. The court agreed with the statements of the lawyer of the law firm that the plaintiff failed to follow the prior out-of-court settlement procedure, for this reason, the court did not consider the plaintiff’s claim. The client had the litigation costs adjudicated.

 

We represented a public administration authority, namely, a state authority of the Republic of Lithuania, in an administrative dispute over the obligation to take action. Having considered the case, the regional administrative case noted inter alia that delay to take action by an entity of public administration should be understood as omission by such person, where an entity of public administration fails to adopt a decision (positive or negative) to resolve the issue within the period of time established by law. Based on the identified facts, the court ruled that the public administration authority did not refuse to provide the claimant with the assistance provided for in legislation; on the contrary, the authority, within its competence, addressed the corresponding foreign state authorities making inquiries and taking all other actions. The fact that, in the opinion of the claimant, such assistance was not sufficient, did not give any grounds for statements that the authority delayed to take action with regard to the claimant. The claimant’s complaint was rejected as unsubstantiated; the client had the litigation costs adjudicated.

 

We represented the Lithuanian Football Federation in preparing a contract with a new technical manager of the Federation, namely, a Belgian Patrick De Wilde. This specialist, who has 20 years of experience of work as a chief coach, assistant to the chief coach, technical director/manager and consultant both in clubs and national teams, will take charge of the coaches of the Lithuanian national team, proper implementation of the youth development and Anderlecht system as well as of cooperation with the association of training of football coaches.

  • JUNE 2019

    Having heard the cassation appeal prepared by a Law Firm’s lawyer, the Panel of Judges of the Civil Division of the Supreme Court of Lithuania annulled the ruling of the Court of Appeal of Lithuania, which was unfavourable to the client. In its ruling, the Court of Cassation stated, inter alia, that the rules laid down in Articles 6.237 - 6.242 of the Civ...

  • MAY 2019

    We represented our client in a civil dispute regarding the institution of a judicial pledge (hypothec) against a property owned by the client. The appellate court having heard the case, inter alia, upheld the conclusion of the court of first instance stating that by its decision, a court has the right to institute a judicial pledge (hypothec) against an immovab...

  • APRIL 2019

    The Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania upheld the judgement of the regional administrative court favourable to our client in the administrative case according to the client’s complaint against the State Tax Inspectorate. The Chamber of Judges in its ruling has noted that the decision of the tax administrator is an individual legal act (individual a...

  • FEBRUARY 2019

    We successfully represented interests of the provider of the bail at the Supreme Court of Lithuania in solving the question of the repayment of the financial bail in criminal case. The panel of judges noted that a pre-trial measure - financial bail – cannot be a means of securing a civil claim, nor can it serve the purposes of criminal punishment. The Sup...

  • JANUARY 2019

    We successfully represented our client, i.e. district heat supplier, in the civil case concerning declaration of disconnection from the district heating system unlawful and obligation to connect to the district heating system adjudicated by the Supreme Court of Lithuania. The chamber of judges of the court of cassation which has heard the case has, inter alia, ...

>> Archive