SEPTEMBER 2021

The decision of the Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania: Philipp Kirkorov will not be able to enter Lithuania for five years.
 
The Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania has examined the dispute according to the complaint of the Russian performer Philipp Kirkorov on the prohibition of the Migration Department to enter Lithuania for five years.
The Court found that the Migration Department had reasonably assessed the actions of a known performer as a threat to state security. The Court made the conclusion after evaluating the arguments of the Migration Department that, being a popular performer due to his active concert and organizational activities, Philipp Kirkorov influences various levels of society that can be seen as a tool for spreading Russian “soft power”. The Russian Federation exploits the performer to justify its aggressive foreign policy and negatively indoctrinate the population of the Republic of Lithuania, while he supports the occupation policy of the Russian Federation by his own example and deliberate actions.
An Attorney of Vilnius Law Firm SPES represented the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in the case.
 
The agent has the right to conclude a transaction with himself/herself on behalf of the principal provided that this does not harm the interests of the principal.

We are happy with the lawsuit won by the Attorney of the Law Firm after having successfully defended the interests of the client who was sued for annulment of the transaction. Acting under the power of attorney, the client of the Firm entered into a transaction with himself on behalf of another person, but in order to benefit his principal.
In the case, the Court presented the conditions of Article 2.134 (1) of the Civil Code providing that an agent may not conclude contracts in principal’s name either with himself or with a person, whom he represents at the given time, as well as his spouse, parents, children or other close relatives.
The Court clarified that transactions entered into by the agent in breach of the Article 2.134 (1) of the Civil Code are disputed but not void transactions. Such transaction can be challenged only after having established a set of legally significant circumstances: (i) the opposition of the transaction concluded by the representative to the interests of the principal; (ii) the operation of the agent in breach of the rights granted; (iii) third party knowledge or need to know about a conflict of interest. Thus, the Court clarified that a transaction may be declared invalid on the grounds if it actually harms the interests of the principal, the principal did not seek such a transaction and the third party with whom the transaction was concluded was dishonest.