JANUARY 2020

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 its ruling has, inter alia, noted that the purpose of concept of spread of the payment of the tax arrears is to ensure continuity of companies’ activities; therefore, the essential criterion which must be assessed by the tax administrator is maintenance of the company’s solvency which would later allow the company to fully perform its tax obligation. The chamber of judges has emphasised that when adopting the administrative decision of deferral or spread of payment of the tax arrears the tax administrator is, inter alia, bound by the principle of good administration on the basis of which the provision set forth in paragraph 3 of Article 5 of the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania that state institutions shall serve the people is implemented. The chamber of judges has accepted  the position of the court of first instance that the State Tax Inspectorate has failed to properly and fully evaluate the documents provided by the client and adopted its decision without analysing the consequences which could arise in case of refusal to satisfy the customer’s application for spread and/or deferral of the tax arrears. Thus, the State Tax Inspectorate has breached the principle of good administration and the court of the first instance has reasonably annulled the decision and referred the issue concerning deferral and/or spread of the customer’s tax arrears back to the tax administrator for reconsideration.
 
We represented an institution of public administration, i.e. a state institution of the Republic of Lithuania, in the administrative dispute concerning annulment of the decision and obligation to carry out actions. The regional administrative court which has heard the case has, inter alia, in its judgement noted that the diplomatic mission or consular post shall assume full responsibility in assessing whether there is an immigration risk. The purpose of examining visa applications is to detect those applicants who are seeking to immigrate to the Schengen States and set themselves up there, using grounds such as tourism, business, study, work or family visits as a pretext. According to the Code on Visas, a diplomatic mission or consular post shall refuse to issue a visa with a view to establish the purpose of the journey in case of any doubts as to authenticity of the provided and supported documents including the doubt as to veracity of their contents or the reliability of the information received during the interview. The Court has drawn the conclusion that the applicant has failed to justify the purpose and conditions of his stay in the Republic of Lithuania; therefore, it has ruled that the contested decision has been adopted after properly evaluating the facts and provisions of the legislation; thus, there exist no grounds for annulling it on the arguments set out in the applicant’s appeal or other arguments.
 
We represented our client in the office-related dispute with the Ministry of Health of the Republic of Lithuania concerning annulment of a part of the order. Having examined the appeal of the customer, the chamber of judges of the Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania in its ruling has, inter alia, emphasised that the court judgement must be lawful and well-grounded; the court judgement must address all main heads of claim raised by the applicant. The aim of the court in hearing the case is passing a lawful and well-grounded procedural decision; therefore, the court must exercise all its statutory duties and rights for the aim to be achieved. The court of first instance must examine all evidence, establish all facts and evaluate them in legal terms. According to the chamber of judges, in this case, the court of the first instance adjudicating the dispute analysed and addressed not all arguments of the client which may be relevant to fair decision of the case. The chamber of judges partially satisfied the customer’s appeal: the judgement of the regional administrative court which was unfavourable to the client has been annulled and the case was referred back to the court of first instance for rehearing.

  • OCTOBER 2020

    The interests of the former director of a bankrupt company were defended.The firm’s lawyer successfully represented the interests of a client — the former director of a bankrupt company — in civil proceedings for recognising the bankruptcy as fraudulent.The administrator of the bankrupt company applied to the court asking to declare the compan...

  • SEPTEMBER 2020

    The court ruled on the right of the insurer to change the grounds for refusal to pay out an insurance benefit.We defended the client’s interests in a civil dispute with the insurance company over award of the insurance benefit and damage. The court which has heard the case in its judgement, inter alia, stated that the insurer must investigate the circumst...

  • AUGUST 2020

    The court has resolved a dispute between the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and a citizen of the Republic of Lithuania imprisoned in the USA on whom a capital punishment has been imposed.An attorney-at-law of the law firm has successfully represented a client, i.e. the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, in the dispute with a citizen of the Republic of Lithuania imprison...

  • JULY 2020

    We have proven that our client conducted a lawful and transparent public procurement. We represented our client, i.e. waste management system organiser, in a dispute which has arisen out of the legal relations of public procurement. The attorneys-at-law of the law firm successfully proved that the client conducted a transparent and lawful public procuremen...

  • JUNE 2020

    The court ruled on the possibility of applying subsidiary civil liability to the head of a legal person in case the company does not properly fulfill the obligation to pay taxes to the state on time. Attorney at Law of our firm succeeded in defending a client’s interests in the court of appeal. The State Tax Inspectorate (STI) sought to prove that be...