Skip to decisions
Žuk — ANTON и JELENA

Legal archive: reviews of court practice concerning Narva apartment associations

This section contains analytical reviews and editorial summaries of publicly available court decisions concerning relations between apartment owners and apartment associations in Narva. The information has been prepared by the Žuk Kinnisvara team for informational purposes.

We explain complex legal acts in plain language. Our archive is continually updated.

We plan to add reviews of decisions of the Supreme Court of Estonia (Riigikohus) on important issues concerning relations between apartment owners and apartment associations.

Before making important legal decisions, always check the official status and full case text in the state register (Riigi Teataja / e-Toimik).

Subjects and subtopics

A subject describes the dispute; it does not establish a violation.

Additional parameters

Reset all
2-16-10339

Narva linn, Kosmonaudi tn 9, Linda tn 7 korteriühistu · 80180884

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claimsLate-payment interest and consequences of delay

Editorial summary

The parties agreed the outstanding debt with late-payment interest and a payment deadline; the court approved the terms and terminated proceedings.

· RulingViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-16-10339/9Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Narva Unistus: agreement approved for debt payment by 30 June 2017

Ruling · Viru Maakohus · First instance

KÜ NARVA UNISTUS · 80180884

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Claimant – KÜ NARVA UNISTUS; Two defendants XX; Participants’ legal representatives XX

Editorial summary

The parties agreed the outstanding debt with late-payment interest and a payment deadline; the court approved the terms and terminated proceedings.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The court approved an agreement between the apartment association NARVA UNISTUS (now – Narva linn, Kosmonaudi tn 9, Linda tn 7 korteriühistu) and two defendants XX, terminating the case about arrears and late-payment interest. The parties agreed the outstanding debt including interest and a payment deadline. The defendants undertook to pay the agreed amount and 100 euros to reimburse half the court fee. The association had claimed building maintenance expenses and late-payment interest. At the hearing on 21 November, the parties agreed the outstanding amount, the payment deadline and litigation costs; the agreement was entered in the minutes and submitted for court approval. The ruling does not set out the detailed initial calculation or separate objections. The court examined the agreement and documents, found no conflict with the law or good morals and approved the agreed terms. It explained that, following termination, the same dispute between the same participants cannot be brought again, and non-performance of the agreement can be referred to a bailiff. In addition to the 100 euros payable by the defendants under the agreement, the association was awarded a refund from the state budget of the other half of the court fee paid, 100 euros. The ruling establishes neither payment by the defendants nor an actual refund from the budget.

Outcome of this decision

Approve the agreement and terminate proceedings. The two defendants XX undertook to pay the agreed debt with late-payment interest and 100 euros in costs within the agreed period. The association is also awarded a further 100-euro court fee refund from the state budget.
2-16-10912

Narva linn, Madise tn 7, Madise tn 9 korteriühistu · 80180772

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claimsLate-payment interest and consequences of delayObligations of multiple owners

Editorial summary

The defendants did not attend the hearing; the court examined the reasons for absence and granted the claim by default.

· JudgmentViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-16-10912/18Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Grafovi 7,9: court awarded debt and late-payment interest by default after defendants failed to attend

Judgment · Viru Maakohus · First instance

KORTERIÜHISTU GRAFOVI-7,9 · 80180772

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Claimant – KORTERIÜHISTU GRAFOVI-7,9; Two defendants XX – joint owners; Association’s legal representative XX

Editorial summary

The defendants did not attend the hearing; the court examined the reasons for absence and granted the claim by default.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The court granted the apartment association GRAFOVI-7,9’s claim against two defendants XX by default. Arrears with late-payment interest and a 175-euro court fee were awarded jointly and severally. This is a shared obligation: the association may seek the awarded amount from either debtor but may not collect the full amount twice. The association alleged that the defendants jointly owned an apartment and had partly failed to pay building maintenance and utility charges. The defendants did not attend the hearing on 4 November 2016, and the association requested a default judgment. The court checked service of the summonses, the warning about non-attendance and the documents provided about its causes. One defendant sought an adjournment, but the court refused: it considered an objective inability to participate unproved. It also did not find the other defendant’s reason for absence sufficient. One defendant supplied no substantive objections to the claim; the other did not respond to it. The court found no obstacle to proceeding by default, treated the association’s factual allegations as admitted and granted the claim as legally well-founded. The judgment is immediately enforceable. It does not confirm actual payment.

Outcome of this decision

Award arrears with late-payment interest and a 175-euro court fee jointly and severally against the two defendants XX. The judgment is immediately enforceable.
2-16-9388

Narva linn, Tallinna mnt 21 korteriühistu · 80228958

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claims

Editorial summary

The association challenged only the failure to reimburse a 75-euro fee; the court applied the monetary threshold for a costs appeal.

· RulingTartu Ringkonnakohus · Appeal · № 2-16-9388/12Read actAppeal

Separate act page

Tallinna mnt 21: appeal over 75 euros in litigation costs not accepted for proceedings

Ruling · Tartu Ringkonnakohus · Appeal

Korteriühistu Tallinna mnt 21 Narva · 800228928

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Claimant and appellant – Korteriühistu Tallinna mnt 21 Narva; Defendant XX; Association representatives XX

Editorial summary

The association challenged only the failure to reimburse a 75-euro fee; the court applied the monetary threshold for a costs appeal.

The dispute and the court’s decision

Tartu Ringkonnakohus refused to accept the appeal by the apartment association Tallinna mnt 21 Narva against the costs part of a default judgment. The association challenged the failure to reimburse 75 euros in court fees paid. The principal debt was not reviewed in this appeal. The association argued that the county court had incorrectly stated that there were no costs to quantify even though the fee had been paid. It asked for those 75 euros to be awarded against defendant XX. The circuit court explained that the monetary amount of costs may be appealed where the disputed amount exceeds 200 euros. This limitation also applies when costs are quantified in the judgment resolving the case, including a default judgment. The disputed 75 euros did not exceed that threshold, so the appeal was not accepted and was deemed returned. The 50-euro appeal fee had also not been paid. However, the court did not allow time to pay it because the appeal could not in any event be accepted on the stated ground. It separately explained that the costs of challenging the quantification of costs are not reimbursable even if the challenge succeeds. This ruling makes no new award of 75 euros.

Outcome of this decision

Refuse to accept the association’s appeal on costs; the appeal is deemed returned. No new reimbursement of 75 euros is awarded.
2-16-120289

Narva linn, Uusküla tn 5 korteriühistu · 80038301

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claims

Editorial summary

The association reported full payment before the claim was accepted; the court refused acceptance because judicial protection was no longer needed.

· RulingViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-16-120289/4Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Uusküla 5: court did not accept the claim for proceedings after a report of payment

Ruling · Viru Maakohus · First instance

KÜ Uusküla 5 · 80038301

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Claimant – KÜ Uusküla 5; Person named as debtor XX; Association’s legal representative XX

Editorial summary

The association reported full payment before the claim was accepted; the court refused acceptance because judicial protection was no longer needed.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The court refused to accept for proceedings the debt claim by the apartment association Uusküla 5 against XX. Before ordinary civil proceedings began, the association reported full payment of the debt and asked to conclude the case. The court found that the need for judicial protection had ceased. The association had initially applied for a payment order. Following the debtor’s objection, the claim was transferred to Viru Maakohus. That court required a properly formatted claim and payment of an additional court fee within 14 days. Before the claim was accepted, however, the association stated that it no longer wished to begin the hearing process because the debt had been repaid. The result was therefore recorded as refusal to accept the claim for proceedings, rather than termination of already accepted ordinary civil proceedings. The court explained that, following such refusal, the returned application is deemed never to have been filed and the claim never pending before the court. Costs were left with the association; the ruling did not quantify them. It makes no new debt award.

Outcome of this decision

Refuse to accept the association’s claim against XX for proceedings. The association bears costs; no new monetary award is made.
2-16-13519

Narva linn, Joala tn 5 korteriühistu · 80158985

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claimsLate-payment interest and consequences of delay

Editorial summary

After personal service of the claim, the defendant did not respond; the court awarded debt, interest and part of the costs claimed by default.

· JudgmentViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-16-13519/5Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Joala 5: debt and interest awarded by default, claim drafting costs refused

Judgment · Viru Maakohus · First instance

KÜ Joala 5 · 80158985

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Claimant — KÜ Joala 5; Defendant — owner XX; Association’s statutory representative XX

Editorial summary

After personal service of the claim, the defendant did not respond; the court awarded debt, interest and part of the costs claimed by default.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The court granted the apartment association Joala 5’s claim against owner XX by default for debt, accrued late-payment interest and further interest until the principal obligation was fulfilled. After personal service of the documents, the defendant did not respond within the 14 days allowed. The association had requested a default judgment in advance if no response was submitted. The court found the claim legally justified and applied the rules under which the claimant’s factual assertions are treated as admitted by the defendant in a default procedure. This is not an adversarial examination of objections that the defendant did not submit. Of the costs, a 175 euro state fee was awarded. Reimbursement of 60 euros for drafting the claim was refused: the claim was signed by the association’s statutory representative and there was no contractual representative in the case. The judgment is immediately enforceable; it does not confirm actual payment.

Outcome of this decision

Grant the debt and interest claim by default. Award the 175 euro state fee; refuse 60 euros in claim drafting costs because no contractual representative participated in the proceedings. The judgment is immediately enforceable.
2-15-105517

Narva linn, Võidu prospekt 10 korteriühistu · 80183397

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claimsLate-payment interest and consequences of delayBills and justification of chargesPayment accounting and set-offLimitation of claimsObligations of multiple owners

Editorial summary

The court examined limitation and the association’s calculations and dismissed the claim: the older part was time-barred, and the tables did not show debt for the rest.

· JudgmentViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-15-105517/55Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Võidu 10: claim dismissed because older demands were time-barred and calculations showed no debt

Judgment · Viru Maakohus · First instance

KÜ Võidu 10 · 80183397

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Claimant — KÜ Võidu 10; Two defendants XX; Participants’ representatives XX

Editorial summary

The court examined limitation and the association’s calculations and dismissed the claim: the older part was time-barred, and the tables did not show debt for the rest.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The court dismissed the apartment association Võidu 10’s debt and late-payment interest claim against two defendants XX. Limitation was applied to the older part of the claims; for the later period, the court found no debt on the dates examined according to the association’s tables. The association revised its calculation several times. One defendant argued that the principal had been paid, some claims were brought after limitation had expired, and payments exceeded charges during the remaining period. The second submitted no substantive response. The association submitted tables, but not the invoices themselves or information allowing the court to establish who made particular payments and when. The court found that claims for 1 May 2009 to 31 December 2011 had become time-barred before the application was filed in March 2015. The corresponding interest claims became time-barred together with the principal claim. For the later charges, the court examined payments and concluded that the association’s tables showed no debt either on 31 May 2015 or on 30 June 2016. Interest on this part was also found unjustified. The court stated that performance of a joint and several obligation by one debtor releases the others to the corresponding extent. No refund of an alleged overpayment was awarded to the defendants. The association was left to bear its own costs and ordered to bear the defendants’ costs. It was ordered to pay the state 348,24 euros for state legal aid within three months after the judgment entered into force. Actual payment of costs is not confirmed.

Outcome of this decision

Dismiss the association’s claim against the two defendants XX. The association bears the costs; award the state 348,24 euros for legal aid, payable within three months after the judgment enters into force. No refund of overpayment to the defendants was ordered.
2-16-107757

Narva linn, Kivilinna tn 4 korteriühistu · 80228651

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claimsLate-payment interest and consequences of delay

Editorial summary

The short judgment grants the association’s claim and retains security for the claim. The court explained the ten-day procedure for notifying an intention to appeal so that a factual description and reasons can be added.

· JudgmentViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-16-107757/27Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Daumani 4: debt and interest awarded, interim protection of the claim retained

Judgment · Viru Maakohus · First instance

Korteriühistu Daumani 4 · 80228651

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Claimant — Korteriühistu Daumani 4; Defendant XX; Parties’ representatives XX

Editorial summary

The short judgment grants the association’s claim and retains security for the claim. The court explained the ten-day procedure for notifying an intention to appeal so that a factual description and reasons can be added.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The court granted the apartment association Daumani 4’s claim against XX for debt and late-payment interest. In addition to principal and accrued interest, it awarded further interest of 0,07% per day on unpaid principal until payment in full. The defendant was ordered to bear court costs; the state fee and contractual representation costs found necessary and justified were awarded. Previously imposed measures securing the claim were left unchanged. This act does not disclose their content. The preserved text contains the operative part and appeal procedure without a detailed account of arguments, evidence or reasons. The case was heard under the simplified procedure. The court did not grant permission to appeal and stated that admission of an appeal was possible on the grounds specified in the act of an obvious material error of law, procedure or assessment of evidence. A participant intending to appeal must notify the county court within 10 days of service of the operative part. The judgment is then supplemented with a factual description and reasons, and the 30-day appeal period runs from service of the supplemented full text. This is the procedure explained by the court; supplementation, further review and payment of the awarded sums have not been established.

Outcome of this decision

Grant the association’s claim against XX: award principal, accrued late-payment interest, further interest of 0,07% per day until payment of principal, and court costs. Retain the measures securing the claim. A ten-day deadline is stated for notifying the court of an intention to appeal to obtain a supplemented judgment.
2-16-114467

Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 17 korteriühistu · 80070061

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claimsLate-payment interest and consequences of delay

Editorial summary

The defendant did not respond after service of the documents; the court awarded debt, interest and part of the association’s costs by default.

· JudgmentViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-16-114467/5Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Kangelaste 17: default award of debt with interest and part of the costs

Judgment · Viru Maakohus · First instance

KÜ Kangelaste 17 · 80070061

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Claimant — KÜ Kangelaste 17; Defendant XX; Association’s statutory representative XX

Editorial summary

The defendant did not respond after service of the documents; the court awarded debt, interest and part of the association’s costs by default.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The court granted the apartment association Kangelaste 17’s claim against XX for debt and late-payment interest by default and awarded part of the court costs. The documents were served through a person living with the defendant; no written response was received within the 14 days allowed. The court accepted a 200 euro state fee and 0,32 euros in bank charges, a total of 200,32 euros. Reimbursement of 130 euros for legal assistance was refused: documents were submitted by the association’s statutory representative and there was no contractual representative in the proceedings. A further 20 euros in payment order costs was not awarded because the court did not find that such costs had been incurred. The judgment is immediately enforceable. The award of debt and costs does not confirm actual payment.

Outcome of this decision

The debt and interest claim was granted by default. Costs of 200,32 euros were awarded; the additional 130 euros for legal assistance and 20 euros in costs were refused. The judgment is immediately enforceable.
2-16-11537

Narva linn, Uusküla tn 1 korteriühistu · 80175825

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claimsInstalments and payment schedules

Editorial summary

The defendant admitted the claim and requested instalments; the court granted the demands and set monthly payments.

· JudgmentViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-16-11537/7Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Uusküla 1: court granted an admitted claim and allowed payments of 400 euros per month

Judgment · Viru Maakohus · First instance

Uusküla tn 1 KÜ · 80175825

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Claimant – Uusküla tn 1 KÜ; Defendant – owner XX; Association’s contractual representative XX

Editorial summary

The defendant admitted the claim and requested instalments; the court granted the demands and set monthly payments.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The court granted the apartment association Uusküla tn 1’s claim against owner XX on the basis of admission. In a written response, the defendant admitted the demands and asked for monthly payments; the court granted the request and set the arrangements for performing the judgment. Litigation costs were also awarded against the defendant. The court noted that immediate admission of a claim does not in itself remove liability for costs: in this case, the defendant’s conduct had given reason to go to court. The defendant raised no objections to the costs. This is a judgment based on admission with court-ordered instalments, rather than a default judgment or approval of a settlement. It is immediately enforceable without security. Admission and the payment schedule do not establish actual payment of the debt or costs.

Outcome of this decision

Grant the association’s claim against XX on the basis of admission; order monthly payments until full payment and award litigation costs. The judgment is immediately enforceable without security.
2-16-11476

Narva linn, Uusküla tn 1 korteriühistu · 80175825

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claimsLate-payment interest and consequences of delay

Editorial summary

The defendant did not respond after personal service of the claim; the court awarded the debt, late-payment interest and costs by default.

· JudgmentViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-16-11476/6Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Uusküla 1: debt and late-payment interest awarded by default; association granted refund of excess court fee

Judgment · Viru Maakohus · First instance

Korteriühistu Uusküla tn 1 · 80175825

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Claimant – Korteriühistu Uusküla tn 1; Defendant XX; Association’s contractual representative XX

Editorial summary

The defendant did not respond after personal service of the claim; the court awarded the debt, late-payment interest and costs by default.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The court granted the apartment association Uusküla tn 1’s claim against XX for arrears and late-payment interest by default and also awarded litigation costs. The claim had been served personally on the defendant against signature, but no response arrived within the time limit. The brief judgment does not give a detailed debt history, charging period or objections from the defendant. The judgment is immediately enforceable. Separately, the court ordered a refund to the association of 25 euros in overpaid court fees from the state budget. This is repayment of an excess fee to the association, rather than an additional award against the defendant. The judgment does not confirm actual payment of the awarded sums or completion of the refund.

Outcome of this decision

Award the association the debt, late-payment interest and litigation costs against XX. Order a refund to the association of 25 euros in excess court fees from the state budget. The judgment is immediately enforceable.
2-15-126339

Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 24 korteriühistu · 80180571

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claimsLate-payment interest and consequences of delay

Editorial summary

The association waived its claim after reporting payment by the new owner; the court terminated the case and left costs with the association.

· RulingViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-15-126339/23Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Kangelaste 24: case ended after payment by a new owner; costs left with the association

Ruling · Viru Maakohus · First instance

KORTERIÜHISTU KANGELASTE 24 · 80180571

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Claimant – KORTERIÜHISTU KANGELASTE 24; Two defendants XX; Association representative XX; Mentioned payer – the new owner

Editorial summary

The association waived its claim after reporting payment by the new owner; the court terminated the case and left costs with the association.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The court accepted the apartment association KANGELASTE 24’s waiver of its claim against two defendants XX and terminated proceedings. The association reported that its demands had been met by the apartment’s new owner, who was not a defendant in this claim. The claim concerned arrears and late-payment interest. The ruling gives no amounts. The claim documents could not be served on the defendants, so the court did not ask for their views on the waiver. It found the waiver permissible and ended the case without a decision on the merits. It explained that the same claim against the same defendants on the same grounds could not be brought again. Costs were left with the association. The court specifically noted that the demands had been met by the new owner, rather than the defendants, so the costs exception for payment by a defendant after filing did not apply. The court identified no costs reimbursable to other participants. The association requested a court fee refund. The court left this for a separate ruling after the present ruling becomes final. No refund was ordered by this ruling itself.

Outcome of this decision

Accept the waiver and terminate proceedings. The association bears costs; no sums are reimbursable to participants. The court fee refund question is to be decided separately after the ruling becomes final.
2-16-10336

Narva linn, Kosmonaudi tn 9, Linda tn 7 korteriühistu · 80180884

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claimsInstalments and payment schedulesLate-payment interest and consequences of delay

Editorial summary

The settlement sets instalments and default consequences but does not prove later payment.

· Court orderViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-16-10336/6Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Debt instalments under an approved settlement

Court order · Viru Maakohus · First instance

KORTERIÜHISTU NARVA UNISTUS · 80180884

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Association — claimant and settling party; XX — defendant and settling party

Editorial summary

The settlement sets instalments and default consequences but does not prove later payment.

The dispute and the court’s decision

KORTERIÜHISTU NARVA UNISTUS (now — Narva linn, Kosmonaudi tn 9, Linda tn 7 korteriühistu). KORTERIÜHISTU NARVA UNISTUS and XX agreed to settle a debt claim. Following a partial payment, XX acknowledged the remaining debt and the agreed share of costs. The settlement provides for three instalments; a delay of even one day on any instalment makes the whole balance immediately due and triggers daily late-payment interest of 0.07% on the unpaid part. The source does not disclose the substantive basis of the original claim.

Outcome of this decision

The court approved the settlement and terminated the proceedings. Costs follow the agreement; each party bears its costs not covered by it. The court reserved the refund issue for a separate order after this order becomes final.