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
2-16-105937

Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 34 korteriühistu · 80170621

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

Editorial summary

The default award includes notarial costs and joint and several liability of two co-owners.

· JudgmentViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-16-105937/8Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Kangelaste 34: joint and several award and notarial costs

Judgment · Viru Maakohus · First instance

KÜ Kangelaste 34 · 80170621

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: claimant — KÜ Kangelaste 34; two defendants — co-owners XX

Editorial summary

The default award includes notarial costs and joint and several liability of two co-owners.

The dispute and the court’s decision

KÜ Kangelaste 34 (now — Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 34 korteriühistu). KÜ Kangelaste 34 sought management charges, late-payment interest and reimbursement of notarial costs incurred to formalise the rights of two co-owners XX. Both received the claim documents against signature but did not respond. The court allowed the claim by default, treating the association’s factual allegations as admitted in that procedure and the claim as legally justified. Debt, accrued late-payment interest, notarial costs and litigation costs of 545 euros were awarded jointly and severally. The association may seek performance from any debtor without recovering the same debt repeatedly. Further late-payment interest of 0.07% per day was awarded on the principal from 1 May 2016 until payment. The judgment is immediately enforceable without security; actual performance was not established.

Outcome of this decision

The claim was allowed by default; debt, late-payment interest and costs were awarded jointly and severally against two co-owners.
2-16-8048

Narva linn, Võidu prospekt 10a korteriühistu · 80183279

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

Editorial summary

Failure to pay on time removes the agreed late-payment interest reduction.

· Court orderViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-16-8048/4Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Võidu 10A: conditional reduction of late-payment interest by settlement

Court order · Viru Maakohus · First instance

KORTERIÜHISTU VÕIDU 10A · 80183279

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: claimant — KORTERIÜHISTU VÕIDU 10A; defendant — XX

Editorial summary

Failure to pay on time removes the agreed late-payment interest reduction.

The dispute and the court’s decision

KORTERIÜHISTU VÕIDU 10A (now — Narva linn, Võidu prospekt 10a korteriühistu). The court approved a settlement between KORTERIÜHISTU VÕIDU 10A and XX concerning management charges and late-payment interest and discontinued proceedings. The association agreed to reduce late-payment interest if the agreed amount was paid by 3 June 2016 inclusive. No further late-payment interest accrues on that debt up to that date. If the payment condition is breached, the full agreed amount without the reduction becomes payable immediately. This is a conditional late-payment interest reduction rather than unconditional forgiveness of part of the debt. Other costs remain with each party; refund of the state fee is reserved for a separate order after the order’s entry into force. The parties waived appeal. The order does not establish whether the payment condition was met.

Outcome of this decision

The settlement was approved and proceedings discontinued; the late-payment interest reduction depends on timely payment.
2-16-831

Narva linn, Rahu tn 34 korteriühistu · 80145907

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claims

Editorial summary

Under the approved agreement, the association pays 3438,39 euros when the ruling enters into force; each party bears its own costs.

· RulingViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-16-831/17Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Rahu 34: association agreed to pay the company 3438,39 euros after the ruling entered into force

Ruling · Viru Maakohus · First instance

OÜ N ja V · KÜ Rahu 34 Narva · 11189800 · 80145907

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Claimant — OÜ N ja V; Defendant — KÜ Rahu 34 Narva

Editorial summary

Under the approved agreement, the association pays 3438,39 euros when the ruling enters into force; each party bears its own costs.

The dispute and the court’s decision

OÜ N ja V brought a monetary claim against the apartment association Rahu 34 Narva. The parties reached an agreement under which the association undertook to pay the company 3438,39 euros after the approving ruling entered into force. The payment relates to an invoice dated 30 September 2015 identified in the agreement; the act does not describe particular works or services. The claim was admitted on 22 January 2016. On 9 June, the parties asked for the agreed terms to be approved and the case ended. The court found no conflict with the law or good morals, approved the agreement and terminated the proceedings without separately determining the merits of the original claim. Each participant bears its own costs. The company was to receive a refund of 150 euros, half the state fee paid. If the agreement is not performed, the creditor may apply to a bailiff. The court also explained that the same dispute between the same parties cannot be brought again. The parties shortened the appeal period to three days. The ruling does not confirm payment by the association or actual refund of the fee.

Outcome of this decision

The agreement was approved and the case terminated. The association must pay the company 3438,39 euros after the ruling enters into force. Each party bears its own costs; the company is to receive a 150 euro fee refund.
2-16-4494

Narva linn, Pähklimäe tn 7 korteriühistu · 80183693

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

Editorial summary

Debt and continuing late-payment interest were awarded; recovery of 45 euros in legal fees was refused.

· JudgmentViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-16-4494/5Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Pähklimäe 7/11: debt, continuing late-payment interest and partial refusal of costs

Judgment · Viru Maakohus · First instance

KÜ Pähklimäe 7/11 · 80183693

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Claimant — KÜ Pähklimäe 7/11; Defendant — XX

Editorial summary

Debt and continuing late-payment interest were awarded; recovery of 45 euros in legal fees was refused.

The dispute and the court’s decision

KÜ Pähklimäe 7/11 (now — Narva linn, Pähklimäe tn 7 korteriühistu) brought a debt claim against XX. After service of the claim, no response arrived on time. The court entered judgment by default without a descriptive section or reasoning. Principal, accrued late-payment interest and further late-payment interest of 0.07% per day on principal from 01.03.2016 until full payment were awarded. All procedural costs were imposed on XX; reimbursable costs were fixed at 250 euros and awarded to the association. The court refused an additional 45 euros in legal fees. The provided act does not explain that refusal. The judgment is immediately enforceable without security. The defendant was informed of kaja within 30 days after service or, for public service, after learning of the judgment or enforcement proceedings. The claimant was informed of an appeal to Tartu Ringkonnakohus within 30 days after service, no later than five months after public announcement. The act separately explains that the amount of costs may be challenged where the contested amount exceeds 200 euros. Actual performance or subsequent review is not established.

Outcome of this decision

Principal, accrued late-payment interest, further late-payment interest of 0.07% per day on principal from 01.03.2016 until payment and 250 euros in costs were awarded by default. Recovery of 45 euros in legal fees was refused. The judgment is immediately enforceable without security.
2-15-16874

Narva linn, A. Puškini tn 49 korteriühistu · 80180192

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

Latest prepared act · · № 2-15-16874/21

Editorial summary

The claim against the new owner was partly granted: the oldest claims were excluded by limitation and interest was limited to the period of the buyer’s own delay.

Acts in this casePrepared acts: 1 · Unprepared stages: 1
· JudgmentViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-15-16874/21Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Puškini 49: apartment buyer ordered to pay part of an earlier debt, with interest substantially limited

Judgment · Viru Maakohus · First instance

KÜ Puškini 49 · OÜ Peremaakler · 80180192 · 11523072

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Claimant — KÜ Puškini 49; Defendant — apartment buyer OÜ Peremaakler

Editorial summary

The claim against the new owner was partly granted: the oldest claims were excluded by limitation and interest was limited to the period of the buyer’s own delay.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The apartment association Puškini 49 brought a claim for earlier utility debt and late-payment interest against OÜ Peremaakler, which had bought an apartment at auction. The court partly granted the claim, awarding 2615,28 euros in principal and 21,10 euros* in interest. Each participant bears its own costs, and the association must also pay the state a further 100 euros in missing fees. The association relied on the auction terms and the buyer’s awareness of the debt. The company disputed the calculations and invoked limitation; when paying, it specified the periods covered. An interim judgment of 19 April 2016 had already applied limitation to claims for 2004–2011. The present judgment concerns the remainder. The court proceeded from the company’s acknowledgement of debt from 2012 onwards and checked the charges and payment evidence for 2012 to February 2016. On reconciliation, it determined a balance of 2615,28 euros, accounting for paid invoices and an overpayment in one month. It did not accept the association’s calculation in full. The court rejected interest for the period before purchase on grounds of good faith: in this case, transfer of the principal obligation did not automatically entail liability for the previous owner’s delay. It calculated interest from 24 March 2015, the date on which it recognised the company as owner, using the invoices and its payment dates. The result was 21,10 euros*. The court determined the fee by adding principal and interest: the association had paid 400 euros instead of the 500 euros considered necessary by the court, so it was ordered to pay a further 100 euros. The act does not confirm actual performance of the awards.

Outcome of this decision

Award the association 2615,28 euros in debt and 21,10 euros* in late-payment interest against OÜ Peremaakler. Each party bears its own costs. The association must pay the state a further 100 euros in fees.
Not prepared yet

· Case 2-15-16874 · Viru Maakohus · First instance

2-15-17497

Narva linn, A. Puškini tn 22 korteriühistu · 80189336

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claims

Editorial summary

The claim had already been admitted, but the defendant died before service; the court left it unexamined and explained the possibility of bringing a new claim.

· RulingViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-15-17497/12Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Puškini 22: claim left without examination after the defendant died before service of documents

Ruling · Viru Maakohus · First instance

Puškini tn. 22 korteriühistu · 80189336

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Claimant — Puškini tn. 22 korteriühistu; Person named as defendant — XX

Editorial summary

The claim had already been admitted, but the defendant died before service; the court left it unexamined and explained the possibility of bringing a new claim.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The apartment association Puškini tn. 22 brought a debt claim against XX. The court admitted the claim on 30 November 2015, but could not serve it on the defendant, who died before receiving the procedural documents. The association said it wished to pursue the claim against the heir. The court left the claim without examination. It explained that proceedings had not yet begun for the defendant because the claim had not been served. The court therefore considered substitution by a legal successor within this case impossible. The ruling did not determine the existence or amount of the debt, the identity of the heirs or their liability. The association was informed of its right to bring a new claim against a new defendant in separate proceedings. Costs were left to the association; there were no costs reimbursable to the other party. This is a decision to leave the claim without examination, rather than dismissal of the monetary claim on the merits.

Outcome of this decision

Leave the association’s claim against XX without examination. The association bears the costs; there are no reimbursable costs.
2-16-2315

Narva linn, Kreenholmi tn 33 korteriühistu · 80175469

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

Editorial summary

Late-payment interest on principal and on litigation costs has different bases and starting points.

· JudgmentViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-16-2315/5Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Kreenholmi 33: debt and separate bases for late-payment interest

Judgment · Viru Maakohus · First instance

KÜ Kreenholmi 33 · 80175469

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: claimant — KÜ Kreenholmi 33; defendant — owner XX

Editorial summary

Late-payment interest on principal and on litigation costs has different bases and starting points.

The dispute and the court’s decision

KÜ Kreenholmi 33 (now — Narva linn, Kreenholmi tn 33 korteriühistu). KÜ Kreenholmi 33 claimed management charges and late-payment interest from owner XX. No timely response followed service. The court allowed the claim by default, treating the association’s factual allegations as admitted and the claim as legally justified. The court awarded debt, accrued late-payment interest and costs of 235 euros. Under the operative part, further late-payment interest of 0.07% per day runs on the principal from 1 June 2016 until payment. Separate late-payment interest runs on unpaid costs from the judgment’s entry into force until payment, at the European Central Bank main refinancing rate applicable for each half-year plus eight percentage points annually. The bases and starting points differ. The judgment is immediately enforceable without security but does not establish payment.

Outcome of this decision

Debt, late-payment interest and costs were awarded by default; further late-payment interest on debt and costs runs separately.
2-16-106104

Narva linn, Rakvere tn 40 korteriühistu · 80175535

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claims

Editorial summary

After transfer from payment order proceedings, the company did not comply with the requirements for formulating the claim and paying the fee.

· RulingViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-16-106104/3Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Rakvere 40: company’s application not accepted for proceedings because no proper claim was filed and the fee was underpaid

Ruling · Viru Maakohus · First instance

Aniks Osaühing · KORTERIÜHISTU RAKVERE 40 · 11522256 · 80175535

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Applicant — Aniks Osaühing; Person against whom the claim was brought — KORTERIÜHISTU RAKVERE 40

Editorial summary

After transfer from payment order proceedings, the company did not comply with the requirements for formulating the claim and paying the fee.

The dispute and the court’s decision

Aniks Osaühing sought 2997 euros from the apartment association Rakvere 40. After transfer from payment order proceedings to ordinary claim proceedings, the company did not comply with the requirement to formulate and substantiate its claim and pay the additional fee. The court refused to accept for proceedings the application; the existence of the debt was not decided on the merits. On 8 April 2016, Pärnu Maakohus transferred the claim to Viru Maakohus. The same day, Viru Maakohus required defects in the application to be remedied within 14 days of receipt of the ruling. The company received it on 11 April, but no proper claim or additional fee arrived in time. The source does not specify why the payment order proceedings ended. The court noted that the payment order application available to it contained neither documents supporting the claim nor documents proving the representative’s authority. A fee of 89,91 euros had been paid, whereas for a claim valued at 2997 euros the court determined the required fee to be 275 euros. The missing 185,09 euros was not paid. Costs were left to the company; no costs were reimbursable to the other party. The court explained that, upon refusal to accept for proceedings and return, the application is regarded as never filed or pending in ordinary claim proceedings.

Outcome of this decision

Refuse to accept for proceedings Aniks Osaühing’s application against the association to ordinary claim proceedings. The company bears the costs; there are no reimbursable costs.
2-15-110882

Narva linn, A. Puškini tn 2a korteriühistu · 80245744

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claimsLate-payment interest and consequences of delayBills and justification of chargesApartment association board and managementAuthority and representation

Editorial summary

Objections about authority and accounts did not remove the duty to pay established charges.

· JudgmentViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-15-110882/16Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Narva Sõbralik: objections to authority and charges

Judgment · Viru Maakohus · First instance

KÜ Narva Sõbralik · 80245744

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: claimant — KÜ Narva Sõbralik; defendant — owner XX

Editorial summary

Objections about authority and accounts did not remove the duty to pay established charges.

The dispute and the court’s decision

KÜ Narva Sõbralik (now — Narva linn, A. Puškini tn 2a korteriühistu). KÜ Narva Sõbralik claimed management charges and late-payment interest from owner XX. The defendant disputed the signatory’s authority, the response deadline, the basis for the charge under the articles and the annual accounts. The court confirmed authority using a registry extract as at filing; the order admitting the claim provided a response period. The provision cited by the defendant concerned members’ rights rather than the disputed charge; other comments about accounts were considered irrelevant to this claim. The court found that the association had provided the necessary evidence and there were no substantive objections to the specific debt or calculation. The claim was allowed in simplified proceedings: debt, accrued late-payment interest, further late-payment interest under the operative part of 0.07% per day on principal from 1 August 2015 until payment, and the state fee were awarded. The court considered the objections filed; this was not a default judgment. Performance was not established.

Outcome of this decision

The claim was allowed after examination of the objections; debt, late-payment interest and the state fee were awarded.
2-15-8537

Narva linn, Kreenholmi tn 30 korteriühistu · 80145994

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claimsLate-payment interest and consequences of delayPayment accounting and set-off

Latest prepared act · · № 2-15-8537/27

Editorial summary

Payment before judgment precluded a repeated award but left costs to be decided.

Acts in this casePrepared acts: 2 · Unprepared stages: 1
· JudgmentTartu Ringkonnakohus · Appeal · № 2-15-8537/27Read actAppeal

Separate act page

Kreenholmi 30: paid debt and first-instance costs

Judgment · Tartu Ringkonnakohus · Appeal

Korteriühistu Kreenholmi 30 · 80145994

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: claimant and appellant — Korteriühistu Kreenholmi 30; defendant and respondent — owner XX

Editorial summary

Payment before judgment precluded a repeated award but left costs to be decided.

The dispute and the court’s decision

Korteriühistu Kreenholmi 30 (now — Narva linn, Kreenholmi tn 30 korteriühistu). KÜ Kreenholmi 30 appealed the partial allowance of its claim against owner XX. Principal was paid after filing but before judgment; the first-instance court refused to award it again and awarded only accrued late-payment interest. The allocation dispute concerned current invoices and an earlier judicial settlement: payment descriptions distinguished the obligations. The appellate court preserved that result. It rejected the argument that the claim had been admitted: the defendant had not admitted it, and payment before judgment did not justify a fresh award of an extinguished claim. Only costs were changed. As payment followed filing, the defendant’s conduct caused the first-instance costs. The association was awarded 397 euros: a 175-euro state fee and 222 euros for necessary legal assistance. The appeal was allowed in part; each party bears its appeal costs. Payment of principal was established, but payment of late-payment interest and costs was not.

Outcome of this decision

The appeal was allowed in part: paid principal was not awarded again, and the association was awarded 397 euros in first-instance costs.
· JudgmentViru Maakohus Narva kohtumaja · First instance · № 2-15-8537/19Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Allocation of payments between current charges and an earlier settlement

Judgment · Viru Maakohus Narva kohtumaja · First instance

Korteriühistu Kreenholmi 30 · 80145994

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Association — claimant; XX — defendant, owner and payer

Editorial summary

The court respected the payer’s stated allocation and distinguished principal from late-payment interest.

The dispute and the court’s decision

Korteriühistu Kreenholmi 30 (now — Narva linn, Kreenholmi tn 30 korteriühistu). Korteriühistu Kreenholmi 30 claimed building management arrears and late-payment interest from XX. The association allocated some payments to an older settlement debt. The court found that payment descriptions clearly distinguished current apartment charges from compliance with the earlier court decision. Giving effect to the payer’s allocation, it treated the principal claimed as paid but allowed accrued late-payment interest. On 15 April 2016, Tartu Ringkonnakohus changed only the allocation of first-instance costs: XX must reimburse the association 397 euros. The findings on payment of principal and the award of late-payment interest remained unchanged.

Outcome of this decision

Only late-payment interest was awarded. The principal was not awarded again because of the proven payments. Initially, each party bore its own costs. On 15 April 2016, Tartu Ringkonnakohus changed only that part: XX must reimburse the association 397 euros in first-instance costs; each party bears its own appeal costs.
Not prepared yet

· Case 2-15-8537 · Viru Maakohus · First instance

2-16-587

Narva linn, Kosmonaudi tn 5 korteriühistu

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

Editorial summary

The default judgment imposed joint and several liability on three owners.

· JudgmentViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-16-587/11Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Kosmonaudi 5: joint and several award against three owners

Judgment · Viru Maakohus · First instance

KÜ Kosmonaudi 5 · 801701189

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: claimant — KÜ Kosmonaudi 5; three defendants — owners XX

Editorial summary

The default judgment imposed joint and several liability on three owners.

The dispute and the court’s decision

KÜ Kosmonaudi 5 sought management charges and late-payment interest from three owners XX. The claim documents were served, but no substantive responses were filed in time. In the default proceedings, the court treated the association’s factual allegations as admitted and examined their legal basis. The court awarded principal, accrued late-payment interest and costs of 245 euros jointly and severally by default. Performance may be demanded from any debtor, without recovering the same debt repeatedly. Further late-payment interest of 0.07% per day was awarded on the principal from 11 January 2016 until payment. The judgment is immediately enforceable without security and does not establish actual payment.

Outcome of this decision

The claim was allowed by default; debt, late-payment interest and costs were awarded jointly and severally.
2-16-2463

Narva linn, Juhkentali tn 6 korteriühistu · 80236679

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

Editorial summary

The court approved a three-month payment schedule and separate reimbursement of costs.

· Court orderViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-16-2463/6Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Jaamaga: instalments approved by settlement

Court order · Viru Maakohus · First instance

Jaamaga KÜ · 80236679

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: claimant — Jaamaga KÜ; defendant — owner XX

Editorial summary

The court approved a three-month payment schedule and separate reimbursement of costs.

The dispute and the court’s decision

Jaamaga KÜ (now — Narva linn, Juhkentali tn 6 korteriühistu). Jaamaga KÜ claimed management charges and late-payment interest from owner XX. The parties agreed the outstanding balance after an earlier partial payment and payment over three months. Litigation costs of 325 euros are payable separately by 31 July 2016; current invoices remain a separate obligation. The court approved the settlement and discontinued proceedings without a separate judgment on the original claims. The same parties cannot bring the same claim again; breach of the settlement can lead to enforcement. By agreement, the appeal period was shortened to three days after service of the order. The order does not establish that future payments were made.

Outcome of this decision

The settlement was approved and proceedings discontinued. The balance is payable by instalments, with costs separately.