Legal archive: reviews of court practice concerning Narva apartment associations

The apartment association Puškini 25 brought a claim against OÜ LAHKUS for 14 389,34 kroons. The association later reported that the parties had reached a compromise, that it no longer had any claims against the defendant, and asked the court to leave the case without examination. The court explained the consequences of waiving a claim and assessed the application according to its substance. By its order of 15 February 2010, the court specifically accepted waiver of the claim and terminated the proceedings. It did not approve the detailed terms of the out-of-court agreement as a judicial settlement or award the debt claimed. The act contains no specific payment deadlines or confirmation of payment. The defendant did not seek reimbursement of its costs from the association. In view of the absence of further claims and the agreement reached, the court left each party to bear its own costs and set no amount of mutual reimbursement. Although the claimant had asked for the case to be left without examination, the court treated its application as waiver of the claim and terminated the proceedings.

Narva linn, Kosmonaudi tn 9, Linda tn 7 korteriühistu, named in the source as KÜ Narva Unistus, brought a monetary claim arising from common ownership against defendant XX. During proceedings, it revised the sum to principal of 7617.99 kroons and interest of 119 kroons as at 1 August 2009. The defendant admitted the claim at the hearing and agreed to the amount of costs. The court granted the admitted claim, awarding debt and accrued interest, plus further interest at 0.07% per day on the overdue sum until proper payment. The judgment was declared immediately enforceable without security. Costs of 1959.50 kroons were awarded against the defendant, including half the fee and legal services. The other half of the fee, 900 kroons, was ordered refunded to the association from the state budget. The parties waived appeal; the source makes entry into force dependent on service on both parties, but service and actual payment have not been reverified.

Narva linn, A. Puškini tn 45a korteriühistu, named in the source as Puškini 45A Korteriühistu, sought a payment order against individual XX for 9045.94 kroons. The debtor admitted 6660 kroons and disputed 2385.94 kroons. On 8 December 2009 Pärnu Maakohus transferred the contested part to Viru Maakohus for claim proceedings. This source does not give the earlier Pärnu case number. On 17 December the association was directed to submit a properly reasoned claim, evidence and an additional court fee. Notice was served on 28 December and the deadline expired on 11 January 2010. The court’s requirements were not met. On 19 January 2010 the court refused admission of the 2385.94-kroon application and allocated costs to the applicant. This was a procedural refusal for unremedied defects, rather than a finding that no debt existed. The substantive basis of debt and subsequent appeals are not established by the decision.