Our client delivered parts for several Volkswagen cars to buyer’s ownership under the supply contract in the amount of RUB 770,000. The buyer’s spouse was a guarantor in this transaction.
Because the payment for the goods was not received in due time, the supplier recovered the outstanding amount from both spouses (the buyer and the guarantor).
The writ of execution was held by bailiffs in the process of enforcement for quite a long time, but so far to no avail. Then the client decided to apply to the arbitration court as a creditor to declare the buyer and the guarantor bankrupt.
Under the supply contract, our client transferred parts for several cars in the amount of RUB 770,000 to buyer’s ownership. The buyer’s spouse was a guarantor in this transaction. Because the payment for the goods was not received in due time, the supplier recovered the outstanding amount from both spouses (the buyer and the guarantor).
The writ of execution was held by bailiffs in the process of enforcement for quite a long time, but so far to no avail. The task of the lawyers was: to assist the client in declaring the buyer and the guarantor (that is, both spouses) bankrupt. The lawyers did the following:
1. Filed an application to declare each debtor bankrupt (twice paid the state duty, twice deposited the remuneration of the financial receiver to the court's deposit account).
2. Proved that the buyer and the guarantor were spouses.
3. Convinced the court that the consolidation of two cases would allow to respect the interests of both the creditor and the debtors.
If the court had refused to consolidate the two proceedings, it would have resulted in increased litigation costs for the creditor, delayed litigation, various conflicting judgments, and delayed settlements with bona fide creditors.
A consumer bought a commercial grade cargo van from a car dealership. When a malfunction occurred in the car, as part of the warranty repair the car owner decided to withdraw from the sales contract. Despite the fact that the car was repaired, the consumer decided to get refund.
The car dealership rejected the buyer's claims since the buyer had no grounds for terminating the contract: the car was repaired and was serviceable.
The car owner disagreed with the dealer's answer and filed a lawsuit with a court at his place of residence. The amount of claims, if satisfied, would have reached about RUB 3 mln rubles, including a penalty and fine under the Law "On the Protection of Consumer Rights".
Every company is obliged to have a trade name. It is not only an obligatory attribute required for its existence, but also a brand identity, to which the company acquires the exclusive right.
Read this article to find out what a trade name should be like, whether there are any restrictions on its content and whether an company is entitled to protection of its “business name”.