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 Supreme Court of Lithuania stated that the court of appeal, while leaving the pre-trial measure (financial bail) valid until full execution of the part of the judgment on compensation of the damage to the victim, unjustifiably constrained the rights of the provider of the bail. The Cassation Court upheld the position of our lawyer stating that the appellate court misinterpreted and misapplied the provisions of the Law on Criminal Procedure regarding pre-trial measures and committed a material breach of the CCP. The cassation appeal was upheld, and the financial bail was returned to its provider.

 

We represented our client – a building owner – in a civil case under the claim of the owner of a neighboring land plot regarding the obligation to demolish the buildings built failing to observe statutory distances from the land plot boundaries. Having heard the case, the court noted in its judgement, among all other things, that when illegality of construction is disputed on the basis of a violation of legislative requirements, the object of proof is the fact of violation of legal acts regulating construction only, i.e. the claimant must specify which legal acts were violated and how. In the case, the client’s buildings were determined to have been built at a much shorter distance than that permitted by law. However, the court assessed this non-compliance in the context of all the circumstances in the case. The court noted that the claimant bought the land plot with the buildings in question already standing there, and with the land plot not yet formed for the defendants, who purchased the land plot with the buildings on it. Under such circumstances, the court concluded that the claimant actually agreed to such a layout of the buildings, because no data have been presented in the case regarding any claims filed in the period of nearly 20 years. The claim was rejected, and the litigation expenses incurred by the client were adjudged in his favour.

 

We represented our client at the appellate court in his dispute with the contractor regarding the settlement under a contract for construction works. Having heard the appellant’s appeal, the court emphasized that in the assessment of evidence furnished by the parties, courts rely on the rule of sufficiency of evidence, and a conclusion on the existence of a particular fact is based on an internal conviction of the court based on a comprehensive and objective examination of all significant circumstances in the case. According to the data in this case, there is not sufficient basis for concluding that the client failed to pay the contractor. No additional deeds of acceptance – transfer of works and VAT invoices issued on their base have been furnished in the case, which could prove the existence of the debt. The panel of judges stated that had the claimant done any additional works, it would have handed over the completed works to the defendant by signing a deed of acceptance – transfer of works and issuing a VAT invoice for the transferred works based on the business practice established between the parties. The absence of such documents allows concluding that it is more likely that the claimant is asking for the adjudgment of a debt unreasonably. The appeal was rejected.

  • 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, ...

  • DECEMBER 2018

    We represented a contracting authority in a public procurement case for the annulment of its decisions. The panel of judges of the Civil Division of the Court of Appeal of Lithuania having heard the case in an appellate procedure noted, inter alia, that when preparing their tenders for the procurement of goods, suppliers must follow official recommendations and...

  • NOVEMBER 2018

    The chamber of judges of the Civil Division of the Court of Appeal of Lithuania upheld the judgement of the regional court which was favourable to the client of the law firm in the civil case concerning annulment of the construction completion declaration and the contract, application of restitution and other heads of claim. The dispute in the case in question ...

  • OCTOBER 2018

    We represented the largest supplier of Western agricultural machinery in Lithuania in a civil case before a regional court, initiated according to the lawsuit against the client for contract termination, restitution and award of damages of more than EUR 70,000. The court hearing the case inter alia stated that the buyer’s right, as established in paragrap...

  • SEPTEMBER 2018

    We represented a national regulatory authority (the Authority) in an administrative dispute over the annulment of a resolution adopted by the Authority. Having heard the case, the Regional Administrative Court noted, inter alia, that the Authority was granted powers in the field of regulation and supervision over economic undertakings operating in the energy se...

>> Archive