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
2-14-7482

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

Water and sewerageAllocation of water consumption and discrepanciesCalculation of water chargesMeters and readingsApartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claimsBills and justification of chargesLate-payment interest and consequences of delay

Editorial summary

The apartment association NARVA UNISTUS did not prove grounds for allocating additional water costs to one owner. All monetary claims against defendant XX were dismissed.

· JudgmentViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-14-7482/51Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Court refused recovery of charges for unaccounted-for water: the charge was not proved

Judgment · Viru Maakohus · First instance

KORTERIÜHISTU NARVA UNISTUS · 80180884

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Claimant KORTERIÜHISTU NARVA UNISTUS — sought debt and late-payment interest.; Defendant XX — challenged the additional water charge.

Editorial summary

The apartment association NARVA UNISTUS did not prove grounds for allocating additional water costs to one owner. All monetary claims against defendant XX were dismissed.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The association linked the debt to a meeting decision of 29 April 2013 charging one owner 300 euros for alleged unaccounted-for water consumption. It claimed that faulty plumbing allowed water to drip without being recorded by the meter. The defendant denied these allegations and challenged both the inspection reports and the calculation. The initial claim sought 398,27 euros in debt, 51,67 euros in late-payment interest and further interest of 0,07% per day. At the hearing, the association sought 297,95 euros in principal and 130,03 euros in interest. The court found that the disputed balance related to the additional water charge, while the defendant had paid the other charges, which the claimant did not dispute. To recover the money, the association had to prove the total water costs and the basis for allocating them among owners. Invoices and an approved report alone were insufficient. The total costs and allocation data were not submitted to the court. Nor did the meeting minutes explain why the 300 euros was charged only to the defendant. The court regarded the theory of collecting water drop by drop as speculative: the volume of such consumption had not been proved. In its reasons, the court discussed the meeting decision’s conflict with the rules on allocating costs, but then stated that it could not establish the decision’s nullity — absence of legal effect from the time of adoption — because the defendant had not brought a separate claim within the time limit identified by the court. The operative part does not set aside the meeting decision: it dismisses all recovery claims. Costs were allocated to the association. The court identified no costs reimbursable to the defendant and therefore awarded no specific sum to the defendant. The judgment names the association as the apartment association NARVA UNISTUS (now — Narva linn, Kosmonaudi tn 9, Linda tn 7 korteriühistu).

Outcome of this decision

Dismiss all claims by the apartment association NARVA UNISTUS against defendant XX. Leave costs to the association; there are no costs reimbursable to the defendant.
2-10-12720

Narva linn, A. Puškini tn 15 korteriühistu · 80128553

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claims

Latest prepared act · · № 2-10-12720/35

Editorial summary

The court terminated OÜ Stockwhite’s bankruptcy because there were no funds to continue the procedure. The apartment association Puškini 15’s claim for 319,79 euros remained unsatisfied.

Acts in this casePrepared acts: 1 · Unprepared stages: 2
· RulingViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-10-12720/35Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Stockwhite bankruptcy ended without creditor payments; association did not receive 319,79 euros

Ruling · Viru Maakohus · First instance

OÜ Stockwhite · KÜ Puškini 15 · 11199571 · 80128553

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Debtor OÜ Stockwhite – bankrupt company.; Creditor KÜ Puškini 15 – recognised claim received no payment.; Trustee XX – submitted a report and requested termination.

Editorial summary

The court terminated OÜ Stockwhite’s bankruptcy because there were no funds to continue the procedure. The apartment association Puškini 15’s claim for 319,79 euros remained unsatisfied.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The company was declared bankrupt on 10 June 2010. The trustee reported that its assets had been sold, no new receipts or grounds for recovering assets or bringing claims had been found, and funds were insufficient even for the procedure’s own obligations and expenses. No one paid the 1500-euro advance proposed by the court to continue proceedings. According to the report, the bankruptcy estate received 949,39 euros, which was spent on procedural expenses and tax. Creditors received no payments. The court confirmed the recognised claims of nine creditors that remained unsatisfied. These included the apartment association Puškini 15’s claim for 319,79 euros, which had been filed late and ranked in the third priority group. The court agreed with the trustee that insolvency resulted from the economic downturn and competition, rather than established signs of a crime or serious management error. Proceedings ended because of insufficient assets. The trustee is to be released after the company is deleted from the commercial register; company representative XX was appointed custodian of its documents. The court also ordered publication of a termination notice. These orders do not establish that deletion or publication had already occurred.

Outcome of this decision

Terminate OÜ Stockwhite’s bankruptcy proceedings for insufficient assets after the declaration of bankruptcy. Confirm the unsatisfied claims, including 319,79 euros owed to the apartment association Puškini 15. Release the trustee after the company’s deletion from the register, appoint a document custodian and publish a notice.
Not prepared yet

· Case 2-10-12720 · Viru Maakohus · First instance

Not prepared yet

· Case 2-10-12720 · Viru Maakohus · First instance

2-14-16619

Narva linn, Tallinna mnt 15 korteriühistu · 80189402

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

Editorial summary

The brief judgment gives the award and how to request the full text for appeal.

· JudgmentViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-14-16619/82Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Debt claim in simplified proceedings

Judgment · Viru Maakohus · First instance

KÜ Tallinna mnt 15 · 80189402

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: claimant and creditor — KÜ Tallinna mnt 15; defendant XX — person against whom sums were awarded

Editorial summary

The brief judgment gives the award and how to request the full text for appeal.

The dispute and the court’s decision

KÜ Tallinna mnt 15 (now — Narva linn, Tallinna mnt 15 korteriühistu). The court allowed KÜ Tallinna mnt 15’s claim against XX for management-charge debt and late-payment interest in simplified proceedings. The judgment contains the operative part and appeal instructions, but no account of the parties’ arguments or reasons assessing evidence. Principal, accrued late-payment interest and continuing late-payment interest of 0.07% per day on the unpaid portion of the principal amount specified in that condition from 2 October 2014 until payment were awarded. Costs and late-payment interest on them from entry into force were awarded at the relevant ECB main refinancing rate plus eight percentage points annually. Performance is not established. The court gave no separate permission to appeal but explained the possibility where significant manifest errors exist. Notice of an intention to appeal was required within ten days after service of the operative part; after supplementation, an appeal could be filed within 30 days after service of the full text. Supplementation and appeal are not established.

Outcome of this decision

Claim allowed; debt, late-payment interest and costs with late-payment interest awarded. Subsequent performance not established.
2-14-62072

Narva linn, A. Puškini tn 19 korteriühistu · 80054978

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

Editorial summary

The default judgment distinguishes management-cost arrears, continuing late-payment interest and late-payment interest on awarded procedural costs.

· JudgmentViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-14-62072/6Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Puškini 19: management-cost arrears and continuing late-payment interest

Judgment · Viru Maakohus · First instance

Puškini tn üheksateist Korteriühistu · 80054978

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Claimant — Puškini tn üheksateist Korteriühistu; Defendant — XX

Editorial summary

The default judgment distinguishes management-cost arrears, continuing late-payment interest and late-payment interest on awarded procedural costs.

The dispute and the court’s decision

Puškini tn üheksateist Korteriühistu (now — Narva linn, A. Puškini tn 19 korteriühistu) brought a management-cost arrears claim against XX. The court granted the claim by default without a descriptive section or reasoning. The act does not set out scrutiny of individual charges or the defendant’s substantive objections. Principal and accrued late-payment interest were awarded, together with further late-payment interest of 0.07% per day on unpaid principal from 27 March 2015 until payment. Procedural costs were imposed on XX: the association was awarded 419.00 euros in costs. Statutory late-payment interest under the second sentence of VÕS § 113(1) was also awarded on those costs, from the default judgment’s entry into force until performance. Principal, continuing late-payment interest and late-payment interest on costs have different bases and starting points. The judgment is immediately enforceable without security. Public service through Ametlikud Teadaanded was ordered; the court stated that service is deemed effected 15 days after publication of the extract. The defendant may seek reopening by kaja within 30 days 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. Neither receipt of money nor subsequent review is established.

Outcome of this decision

Management-cost arrears, accrued late-payment interest and further late-payment interest of 0.07% per day from 27 March 2015 until unpaid principal is paid were awarded by default. Procedural costs of 419.00 euros and statutory late-payment interest on them from entry into force until performance were awarded. The judgment is immediately enforceable without security.
2-14-60764

Narva linn, Joala tn 10, Joala tn 12 korteriühistu · 80180387

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claimsInstalments and payment schedulesPayment accounting and set-offLate-payment interest and consequences of delay

Editorial summary

Two defendants agreed to repay a debt; the settlement set the priority of current costs and consequences of two consecutive missed instalments.

· Court orderViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-14-60764/15Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Joala 10/12: instalments and priority of current payments

Court order · Viru Maakohus · First instance

KÜ Joala 10/12 · 80180387

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Claimant — KÜ Joala 10/12; Two defendants — XX

Editorial summary

Two defendants agreed to repay a debt; the settlement set the priority of current costs and consequences of two consecutive missed instalments.

The dispute and the court’s decision

KÜ Joala 10/12 (now — Narva linn, Joala tn 10, Joala tn 12 korteriühistu) brought a debt claim against two persons XX. The participants agreed the debt, monthly instalments and reimbursement of 300 euros in the association’s procedural costs. The court approved the settlement and terminated proceedings. Current management costs must be paid on time. If a payment is insufficient for both current costs and an instalment, current costs are covered first and the instalment afterwards. Failure to pay two consecutive instalments on time allows the association to withdraw from the settlement and seek debt recovery through a bailiff; after withdrawal, late-payment interest may be reinstated and recovered in enforcement proceedings. The text does not establish joint and several liability of the two defendants. Costs follow the settlement, and the defendants retain their own costs. After the order’s entry into force, the association is to receive a refund of 100* euros, half the state fee. The settlement excludes an interlocutory appeal; a separate section of the act also states a 15-day appeal period after service, with an outer limit of five months after the order. Actual performance or receipt of the refund is not established.

Outcome of this decision

The settlement was approved and proceedings terminated. Two consecutive overdue instalments allow the association to withdraw and begin recovery with reinstated late-payment interest. Current costs take priority over instalments. Refund 100* euros in state fees to the association after the order’s entry into force.
2-14-58719

Narva linn, Rahu tn 28 korteriühistu · 80158413

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

Editorial summary

Claim decided by default after personal service and failure to respond.

· JudgmentViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-14-58719/7Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Default award and immediate enforcement

Judgment · Viru Maakohus · First instance

KORTERIÜHISTU RAHU 28 · 80158413

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: claimant — KORTERIÜHISTU RAHU 28, sought debt; defendant XX — personally received the claim

Editorial summary

Claim decided by default after personal service and failure to respond.

The dispute and the court’s decision

KORTERIÜHISTU RAHU 28 (now — Narva linn, Rahu tn 28 korteriühistu). KORTERIÜHISTU RAHU 28 claimed debt and late-payment interest from XX. Claim documents were served personally; the court entered default judgment for failure to respond, without descriptive or reasoning sections. Detailed circumstances of the charges and substantive objections are not given. Debt, accrued late-payment interest and 308 euros in costs were awarded: a 200-euro fee and 108 euros in legal costs. No continuing late-payment interest was awarded in the operative part. The judgment is immediately enforceable; this does not establish actual receipt of the award.

Outcome of this decision

Debt, late-payment interest and 308 euros in costs awarded by default; judgment immediately enforceable.
2-14-58703

Narva linn, Rahu tn 20 korteriühistu · 80183492

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

Editorial summary

The court decided the claim after no response to the served documents.

· JudgmentViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-14-58703/8Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Default award of management-charge debt

Judgment · Viru Maakohus · First instance

KÜ Rahu-Sõprus 20 · 80183492

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: claimant — KÜ Rahu-Sõprus 20, sought debt and late-payment interest; defendant XX — did not respond to the served claim

Editorial summary

The court decided the claim after no response to the served documents.

The dispute and the court’s decision

KÜ Rahu-Sõprus 20 (now — Narva linn, Rahu tn 20 korteriühistu). KÜ Rahu-Sõprus 20 claimed management-charge debt and late-payment interest from XX. No timely response was made to the served claim documents. The court allowed the claim by default without descriptive or reasoning sections. The judgment gives no detailed calculation of individual services or substantive objections. Principal, accrued late-payment interest and 233 euros in costs were awarded: a 125-euro fee and 108 euros in legal costs. The judgment is immediately enforceable without security; no continuing late-payment interest was awarded in the operative part. Actual performance is not established.

Outcome of this decision

Debt, late-payment interest and 233 euros in costs awarded by default; judgment immediately enforceable.
2-14-57635

Narva linn, Soldina tn 6 korteriühistu · 80175334

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

Editorial summary

The court granted the association’s debt and late-payment interest claim by default.

· JudgmentViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-14-57635/6Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Tiimani 6: default judgment on debt and late-payment interest

Judgment · Viru Maakohus · First instance

KORTERIÜHISTU TIIMANI 6 · 80175334

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Claimant — KORTERIÜHISTU TIIMANI 6; Defendant — XX

Editorial summary

The court granted the association’s debt and late-payment interest claim by default.

The dispute and the court’s decision

KORTERIÜHISTU TIIMANI 6 (now — Narva linn, Soldina tn 6 korteriühistu) brought a debt and late-payment interest claim against XX. The claim documents had been served and a default judgment was entered for failure to respond. The act contains no descriptive section or reasoning; it does not set out the basis of individual charges or the defendant’s substantive objections. The court granted the claim, awarded principal and late-payment interest, imposed all procedural costs on XX and separately awarded 225 euros in procedural costs. The judgment is immediately enforceable; this does not establish actual receipt of money. The defendant may apply to reopen proceedings by kaja within 30 days after service; in the case of public service, the deadline depends on learning of the judgment or enforcement. The claimant was informed of an appeal to Tartu Ringkonnakohus within 30 days after service, no later than five months after public announcement. No subsequent acts are established by this source.

Outcome of this decision

The claim was granted by default: principal, late-payment interest and 225 euros in costs were awarded; XX bears the procedural costs. The judgment is immediately enforceable; actual enforcement or the result of a subsequent review is not established.
2-14-33416

Narva linn, Pähklimäe tn 4 korteriühistu · 80105173

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claims

Editorial summary

The application by the apartment association Pähklimäe 4 against defendant XX was not accepted: the association had not formalised the claim, paid the additional fee or made a proper application to restore the time limit.

· RulingViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-14-33416/11Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Court refused to accept a debt claim and to restore the time limit

Ruling · Viru Maakohus · First instance

Pähklimäe 4 KÜ · 80105173

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Applicant Pähklimäe 4 KÜ – missed the deadline to remedy defects.; Defendant XX – objected in payment order proceedings.

Editorial summary

The application by the apartment association Pähklimäe 4 against defendant XX was not accepted: the association had not formalised the claim, paid the additional fee or made a proper application to restore the time limit.

The dispute and the court’s decision

Following the debtor’s objection, Pärnu Maakohus terminated expedited payment order proceedings on 15 January 2015 and referred the claim to Viru Maakohus. On 3 February, that court required the association to submit a properly formatted, reasoned statement of claim and pay an additional court fee within 14 days from the day after receipt of the ruling. Receipt was confirmed on 10 February, but the requirements were not fulfilled in time. On 27 February, the association sent an email. The court found that it did not meet the requirements for a reasoned application to restore a time limit: no signed application in Estonian had been supplied, and the omitted procedural step had not been taken at the same time. The court refused to restore the time limit. The original payment order application lacked sufficient evidence of the claim and the representative’s authority, and the court fee had not been paid in full. The court therefore also refused to accept the claim into ordinary civil proceedings. This ruling did not determine the debt itself on its merits. Costs were left with the association.

Outcome of this decision

Refuse to accept the debt application for proceedings and to restore the time limit. Costs are to be borne by the apartment association Pähklimäe 4.
2-14-57644

Narva linn, Soldina tn 6 korteriühistu · 80175334

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

Editorial summary

The association claimed a debt; the court granted the claim by default without a descriptive section or reasoning.

· JudgmentViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-14-57644/15Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Tiimani 6: debt awarded by default judgment

Judgment · Viru Maakohus · First instance

KÜ Tiimani 6 · 80175334

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Claimant — KÜ Tiimani 6; Defendant — XX

Editorial summary

The association claimed a debt; the court granted the claim by default without a descriptive section or reasoning.

The dispute and the court’s decision

KÜ Tiimani 6 (now — Narva linn, Soldina tn 6 korteriühistu) sought payment of a debt from XX. After service of the claim documents, the court entered a default judgment under the rule on failure to submit a response. The judgment contains no descriptive section or reasoning; it does not disclose the particular charges making up the debt or the defendant’s objections. The claim was granted: principal and late-payment interest were awarded. All procedural costs were imposed on XX; the association was separately awarded its paid state fee of 255 euros. The judgment is immediately enforceable without security, but actual receipt of money is not established. The defendant was informed of kaja, an application to reopen proceedings following a default judgment: the deadline is 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 outcome of any subsequent review is unknown.

Outcome of this decision

Principal, late-payment interest and a 255-euro state fee were awarded by default; XX bears the costs. The judgment is immediately enforceable without security. Subsequent enforcement or review is not established.
2-13-44218

Narva linn, Rahu tn 28a korteriühistu · 80158560

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claims

Editorial summary

The court approved the agreement between the apartment association Rahu 28A and NL Kinnisvara OÜ, terminated proceedings and ordered the security to be lifted after the ruling becomes final.

· RulingViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-13-44218/32Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Company agreed a debt of 1 500 euros; judicial mortgage ordered to be removed

Ruling · Viru Maakohus · First instance

KÜ Rahu 28A · NL Kinnisvara OÜ · 80158560 · 12134496

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Claimant KÜ Rahu 28A – creditor under the agreement.; Defendant NL Kinnisvara OÜ – company undertaking the obligation.

Editorial summary

The court approved the agreement between the apartment association Rahu 28A and NL Kinnisvara OÜ, terminated proceedings and ordered the security to be lifted after the ruling becomes final.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The association and the company agreed that the debt on the day the agreement was signed was 1 500 euros. The company undertook to pay it in full by 1 February 2015. The association confirmed that it had no other claims against the company, including late-payment interest or other additional amounts. The court considered the agreement lawful and approved it. Each party bears its own costs. Proceedings were terminated, and the earlier security for the claim is to be lifted after the ruling becomes final. This concerns a judicial mortgage of 8 147,10 euros over the company’s property in the association’s favour, imposed by a ruling of 27 September 2013. The mortgage amount is the security for the former claim, rather than a new debt under the agreement. The parties waived an appeal. The ruling states that it becomes final upon service on the participants; actual service, payment of the agreed debt and deletion of the mortgage entry are not established here.

Outcome of this decision

Approve NL Kinnisvara OÜ’s obligation to pay the apartment association Rahu 28A 1 500 euros by 1 February 2015 and terminate proceedings. Lift the security and remove the judicial mortgage of 8 147,10 euros after the ruling becomes final. Each party bears its own costs.
2-14-59481

Narva linn, Kreenholmi tn 30 korteriühistu · 80145994

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

Editorial summary

The settlement distinguishes reimbursement of costs from a state-budget fee refund.

· Court orderViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-14-59481/12Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Instalments and two separate fee reimbursements

Court order · Viru Maakohus · First instance

KÜ Kreenholmi 30 · 80145994

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: claimant and settlement creditor — KÜ Kreenholmi 30; defendant XX — accepted the payment schedule

Editorial summary

The settlement distinguishes reimbursement of costs from a state-budget fee refund.

The dispute and the court’s decision

KÜ Kreenholmi 30 (now — Narva linn, Kreenholmi tn 30 korteriühistu). The court approved a settlement between KÜ Kreenholmi 30 and XX for monthly payment over nine months of debt, late-payment interest and agreed costs, and terminated proceedings. The settlement includes 108 euros in legal costs and 125 euros representing half the state fee. Late payment of an instalment permits enforcement; that condition adds no further late-payment interest rate. The general costs clause places half the fee, 125 euros, on XX and leaves other costs with the parties. Separately, a state-budget refund is ordered to the association in the amount of 125 euros from its 250-euro fee. Reimbursement by the defendant and the budget refund are distinct obligations. The appeal period was reduced to three days after service. Performance is not established.

Outcome of this decision

Settlement approved and proceedings terminated; an overdue instalment permits enforcement.