We successfully represented a client in a court of appeal in a civil case for damages caused by unfair competition. The panel of judges of the Civil Cases Division of the Court of Appeal of Lithuania, having examined the appeal prepared by advocates of the Law Firm, reversed the judgment of the court of first instance unfavourable for the client. In its judgment, the panel of judges inter alia stated that a former employee of the client, acting without the client's consent, used information constituting the client’s commercial (trade) secret and disclosed it to the company established by himself. In this way, in breach of the prohibition set in the Law on Competition, conditions were created for the company established by the former employee, as the client's direct competitor, to unfairly take over the largest customer of the client. Besides, the panel of judges of the appellate court arrived at the conclusion that the company established by the former employee solicited away the client’s qualified employees and in this way also acquired unfair competitive advantage in respect of the client, seeking to take over orders of the client's partner. The court admitted that the client had suffered indirect damages, i.e. did not earn income it would have earned but for the unlawful actions of the respondents. The Court of Appeal of Lithuania awarded over EUR 1,000,000 as damages for the benefit of the client jointly and severally from the former employee of the client and the company established by him, also most of the litigation costs incurred by the client.
We defended the client's interests in a civil dispute with the insurance company regarding the award of insurance benefits and damages. After examining the case, the court ruled in its judgement that the Law on Insurance establishes that the insurer must investigate circumstances of an insured event and pay the insurance benefit within a term of 30 days, and in case it reduces it or refuses to pay it, it must give a detailed and reasoned written explanation about reasons for such a decision. These provisions prevent the insurer, that refused to pay a benefit on some basis, after the policyholder disputes the validity of such a refusal in court, from indicating other additional bases, which it did not refer to when it refused to pay the insurance benefit. The case file material confirmed that the insurance company unreasonably changed the bases for the refusal to pay the insurance benefit. In such circumstances, the court stated the duty of the insurance company to pay the insurance benefit and indemnify for damages. The claim was upheld in full, the client’s litigation costs were awarded for his benefit.
We represented a client – the organiser of a waste management system – in an administrative dispute over award of an unpaid local fee. The panel of judges of the Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania, having examined the appeal prepared by an advocate of the Law Firm, reversed the judgment of the Regional Administrative Court unfavourable for the client. In its judgment, the appellate court inter alia noted that the local fee and the legal relationship arising out of it are the subject of regulation of public law. This relationship is legal relationship of imperious character between payers of the local fee and institutions of local self-government (persons exercising the authority of these institutions). Therefore, as in case of taxes, payers of local fees are not to be consulted about them. A local fee is to be treated as a fee mandatory for a waste holder. This fee is not linked to the remuneration for services provided and it cannot be treated as payment for a public utility service in private law. The panel of judges stated that the court of first instance incorrectly interpreted and applied provisions of substantive and procedural law. The client’s appeal was upheld in full.
Žemės ūkio paskirties žemės nuoma nuomininkui savaime nesukuria pirmumo teisės įsigyti nuomojamą žemę. Apgynėme kliento interesus teisminiame ginče pagal žemės ūkio paskirties žemės nuomininko reikalavimą perkelti jam žemės sklypo pirkėjo teises ir pareigas.Kontoros advokatui pavyko įrodyti, kad vien formalus žemės ūkio paskirties žemės nuomos sutar...
We defended the client's interests in a civil case under a lawsuit filed against the client regarding the annulment of land donation agreements and the application of restitution. The Court which has heard the case has in its judgement, inter alia, stated that in pursuance of ensuring the stability of civil relations of public interest and adequacy of applicati...
We represented a client (supplier) in an appeal procedure in a public procurement case, based on a claim brought by the client against the contracting authority for the annulment of its decision. The Court of Appeal of Lithuania that settled the case noted in its ruling inter alia that procurement documents must be accurate, clear, without ambiguities in order ...
We represented our client in the tax dispute with the State Tax Inspectorate under the Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Lithuania concerning the refusal to spread the payment of the tax arrears over the respective period. Having examined the appeal lodged by the tax administrator, the chamber of judges of the Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania in i...
We successfully represented a client, a member of the association, in a civil dispute regarding the annulment of a resolution of the general meeting. The court that had examined the dispute noted in its decision, inter alia, that when matters of member removal are addressed, the association must create the most suitable and acceptable conditions (prerequisites)...