Skip to decisions
Žuk — ANTON и JELENA

Narva apartment associations Court decisions

The collection is growing. We explain decisions in accessible language. Browsing by subject helps readers study building management practice, explore similar situations and prevent conflicts.

Materials for studying practice. An editorial summary does not replace an individual legal assessment or promise a dispute outcome.

Subjects and subtopics

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

Additional parameters

Reset all
Case 2-22-139489Source: Riigi Teataja ↗

Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 10b korteriühistu · 80145534

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claimsBills and justification of chargesLate-payment interest and consequences of delayHeatingCalculation and allocation of heating chargesWater and sewerageCalculation of water chargesRepairs and shared propertyFaçade, windows and balconiesOrganisation and funding of repairs

How it started · editorial summary

The court required evidence of tariffs and services despite the absence of a response.

· Court orderViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-22-139489/31Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Checking the basis of management charges

Court order · Viru Maakohus · First instance

Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 10b korteriühistu · 80145534

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: applicant — Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 10b korteriühistu; person concerned XX — debtor

How it started · editorial summary

The court required evidence of tariffs and services despite the absence of a response.

The dispute and the court’s decision

Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 10b korteriühistu claimed management-charge arrears and accrued late-payment interest from XX. After unsuccessful service of a payment proposal, the case was transferred to the county court. The court deemed documents served through the letterbox once procedural conditions were satisfied; XX did not respond. The court requested further evidence of the basis of the charges. The charter, meeting decisions on tariffs and a facade fund, supplier contracts and heating and water-circulation calculations proved the obligation and debt. The application was allowed. Principal, accrued late-payment interest, 470 euros in costs and statutory late-payment interest on costs from entry into force of the decision fixing them were awarded. Continuing late-payment interest on principal was not awarded in the operative part. Subsequent performance is not established.

Outcome of this decision

Application allowed; debt, accrued late-payment interest and 470 euros in costs with statutory late-payment interest on costs awarded.

A checked extract in this language is not yet available.

First instance
Case 2-23-8203Source: Riigi Teataja ↗

Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 18a korteriühistu · 80170383

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claimsLate-payment interest and consequences of delayApartment association meetings and decisionsQuorum and repeat meetingsRights in real propertyOwnership and register entries

How it started · editorial summary

The court distinguished debt recovery from compulsory transfer.

· JudgmentViru Maakohus Narva kohtumaja · First instance · № 2-23-8203/9Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Refusal of transfer claim and recovery of debt

Judgment · Viru Maakohus Narva kohtumaja · First instance

Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 18a korteriühistu · 80170383

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: claimant — Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 18a korteriühistu; defendant XX — owner

How it started · editorial summary

The court distinguished debt recovery from compulsory transfer.

The dispute and the court’s decision

Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 18a korteriühistu sought management-charge debt and compulsory transfer of XX’s apartment ownership. The defendant filed no objections. Only 23 of 90 members participated in the initial owners’ decision where a majority was required; the court held it void. A later decision was supported by 48 of 90. However, three months for voluntary transfer must expire after a valid demand before proceedings are brought; time cannot run from a void decision. The transfer claim was refused. Proven monetary debt, accrued and continuing statutory late-payment interest on the principal were awarded, together with 430* euros in costs and statutory late-payment interest on those costs from the judgment’s entry into force. Performance is not established.

Outcome of this decision

Compulsory transfer claim dismissed; debt, late-payment interest and 430* euros in costs awarded.
Translation of an anonymised, abridged excerpt from Estonian
1. Allow the claim of Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 18a korteriühistu in part.
First instance
Case 2-23-113419Source: Riigi Teataja ↗

Narva linn, Uusküla tn 13 korteriühistu · 80015116

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claimsInstalments and payment schedules

How it started · editorial summary

Following partial payment of utility arrears, the participants agreed on the balance. The court approved the settlement but refused a refund of the payment-order fee.

· Order approving a settlement and ending proceedingsViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-23-113419/14Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Uusküla tn 13: outstanding debt and the state-fee refund

Order approving a settlement and ending proceedings · Viru Maakohus · First instance

Narva linn, Uusküla tn 13 korteriühistu · 80015116

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Applicant — Narva linn, Uusküla tn 13 korteriühistu; Person concerned — XX

How it started · editorial summary

Following partial payment of utility arrears, the participants agreed on the balance. The court approved the settlement but refused a refund of the payment-order fee.

The dispute and the court’s decision

Narva linn, Uusküla tn 13 korteriühistu sought utility arrears. After unsuccessful service of a payment proposal, the case went to the county court. The association reported partial repayment and the participants agreed on payment of the balance. XX agreed to pay the balance and, separately, 385.50 euros in costs within two months after the order enters into force, by instalments or in a single payment. Current bills remain payable; XX bears XX’s own costs. The court approved the settlement and ended the case. Each bears other costs, which were not separately quantified. Subsequent payment is not established. The association was refused a refund of 32.50 euros, half the 65-euro state fee. The fee had been paid in expedited payment-order proceedings; no additional fee was paid at county-court stage. The court applied a non-refund rule effective from February 2023. The general appeal period was reduced to two days; refusal of the fee refund was separately declared unappealable.

Outcome of this decision

Approve payment of the agreed debt balance and, separately, 385.50 euros in costs within two months after the order enters into force, by instalments or in one payment. Current bills remain payable. End proceedings; each bears other costs. Refuse the 32.50-euro state-fee refund.
Translation of an anonymised, abridged excerpt from Estonian
2. End the proceedings in civil case no. 2-23-113419.
First instance
Case 2-23-135924Source: Riigi Teataja ↗

Narva linn, A. Puškini tn 69 korteriühistu · 80426523

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

How it started · editorial summary

The court approved monthly instalments. Additional time for voluntary payment depends on compliance with the schedule; performance is not established.

· Court orderViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-23-135924/3Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

A. Puškini tn 69: additional time to pay the debt

Court order · Viru Maakohus · First instance

Narva linn, A. Puškini tn 69 korteriühistu · 80426523

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Applicant — Narva linn, A. Puškini tn 69 korteriühistu; Debtor, party to the settlement — XX; Association’s representative — XX

How it started · editorial summary

The court approved monthly instalments. Additional time for voluntary payment depends on compliance with the schedule; performance is not established.

The dispute and the court’s decision

Narva linn, A. Puškini tn 69 korteriühistu and XX agreed to pay an acknowledged obligation by instalments. The court approved the settlement and ended proceedings. The participants submitted their written agreement before a payment order was issued; the papers were transferred to Viru Maakohus for approval. The order contains no independent examination of objections to the charges. The obligation includes management costs, other payments, late-payment interest and litigation costs. The association granted additional time for voluntary payment: equal monthly instalments and a separate final payment. A breach requires immediate performance of the entire agreed obligation; the association may claim late-payment interest of 0.02% per day from 1 October 2023 on unpaid management costs and other payments. The court checked that the terms were permissible and enforceable. Each participant bears other costs. The settlement is not a separate ruling that every charge was proved; actual performance of the schedule is not established.

Outcome of this decision

Approve monthly instalments with a separate final payment. Breach requires immediate performance of the entire agreed obligation; the association may claim late-payment interest of 0.02% per day from 1 October 2023 on unpaid management costs and other payments. End proceedings, allocate agreed costs accordingly and leave other costs to each participant.
Translation of an anonymised, abridged excerpt from Estonian
2. End the proceedings in civil case no. 2-23-135924.
First instance
Case 2-18-133659Source: Riigi Teataja ↗

Narva linn, Joala tn 11 korteriühistu · 80189885

Contracts and servicesWorks contracts and designPayment, advance payments and refundsApartment association bills, payments and debtsLate-payment interest and consequences of delay

How it started · editorial summary

The appeal court replaced the dispute’s earlier result with a settlement between association and contractor. The association undertook to pay 3 356,20 euros and proceedings ended.

· RulingTartu Ringkonnakohus · Appeal · № 2-18-133659/52Read actAppeal

Separate act page

Joala tn 11: appeal settlement with contractor approved in place of earlier judgment

Ruling · Tartu Ringkonnakohus · Appeal

Narva linn, Joala tn 11 korteriühistu · Katuse ABC OÜ · 80189885 · 11336757

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: claimant and respondent on appeal – Katuse ABC OÜ; defendant and appellant – Narva linn, Joala tn 11 korteriühistu; organisations’ representatives XX

How it started · editorial summary

The appeal court replaced the dispute’s earlier result with a settlement between association and contractor. The association undertook to pay 3 356,20 euros and proceedings ended.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The apartment association Narva linn, Joala tn 11 and Katuse ABC OÜ settled their works-contract payment dispute on appeal. The circuit court set aside the first-instance judgment, approved payment of 3 356,20 euros under a settlement and terminated proceedings. The contractor sought payment for works and late-payment interest. Viru Maakohus had previously granted the claim, awarding 2 556,20 euros in contractual fees, accrued interest and continuing interest of 0,05% per day. The association appealed, seeking dismissal and costs against the contractor. This ruling does not set out its objections’ detailed grounds. Before the appeal was decided, the parties submitted an agreement. The association undertook to pay the contractor 3 356,20 euros within five working days after it enters into force. Delay entails a contractual penalty of 0,03% of that sum for each day. This is a new settlement term and must not be confused with interest under the judgment set aside. The court checked that the agreement was enforceable and consistent with law, good morals and substantial public interest. It replaced wording on waiver of remaining claims with confirmation that only demands under the approved agreement remain in this case. The dispute thus ended by agreement, rather than an independent waiver of the contractor’s claim. Each party bears its own costs. The court ordered a refund to the association of 210 euros, half the appeal fee. Fees for earlier stages were not refunded because the settlement was reached on appeal. The parties waived appeal against the ruling, and the court stated that no appeal was permitted. The document does not confirm actual payment of the agreed sum.

Outcome of this decision

Set aside the Viru Maakohus judgment of 27.06.2022, approve the settlement and terminate proceedings. The association pays Katuse ABC OÜ 3 356,20 euros within five working days after the agreement enters into force; delay entails a daily contractual penalty of 0,03% of that amount. Each bears its own costs. No demands remain in this case except those under the agreement. Refund the association 210 euros of the appeal fee.
Translation of an anonymised, abridged excerpt from Estonian
1.3. The parties shall bear their own litigation costs.
Appeal
Case 2-22-9914Source: Riigi Teataja ↗

Narva linn, Uusküla tn 1 korteriühistu · 80175825

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claims

How it started · editorial summary

The association withdrew after voluntary payments. The court ended the case and ordered XX to pay 100 euros in costs.

· Court orderViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-22-9914/15Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Uusküla tn 1: withdrawal of a debt claim

Court order · Viru Maakohus · First instance

Narva linn, Uusküla tn 1 korteriühistu · 80175825

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Applicant — Narva linn, Uusküla tn 1 korteriühistu; Person concerned, debtor — XX; Association’s representative — XX

How it started · editorial summary

The association withdrew after voluntary payments. The court ended the case and ordered XX to pay 100 euros in costs.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The court accepted Narva linn, Uusküla tn 1 korteriühistu’s withdrawal of its debt application and ended the proceedings. After the application was filed, debtor XX began making voluntary payments and the association decided not to pursue the principal claim. The association reported voluntary repayment and then withdrew, stating that the debt had been almost entirely paid. It still sought litigation costs and a refund of half the state fee. The person concerned agreed to termination and did not dispute the costs or the obligation to reimburse them. The court accepted the withdrawal and ended the case without separately deciding the original debt claim. Its allocation of costs relied on satisfaction of the claim after filing. The order of 25 August 2023 awarded 100 euros against XX: 75 euros in legal costs and 25 euros in non-refundable state fees. A further 25 euros in state fees was to be refunded to the association from the budget. No interest on litigation costs was awarded because the association had not requested it. The order did not separately establish a specific balance of the original debt.

Outcome of this decision

Accept the association’s withdrawal and end the proceedings. Order XX to bear the costs, pay 100 euros to the association and bear XX’s own costs. Refund 25 euros in state fees to the association.
Translation of an anonymised, abridged excerpt from Estonian
2. End the proceedings in civil case no. 2-22-9914.
First instance
Case 2-23-6125Source: Riigi Teataja ↗

Narva linn, Vahtra tn 4 korteriühistu · 80175765

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claims

How it started · editorial summary

After a report of payment, the association waived its demand. The court accepted the waiver, terminated the case and ordered a 150 euro fee refund to the association.

· RulingViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-23-6125/6Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Vahtra tn 4: debt case terminated after association waived its demand, partial fee refund ordered

Ruling · Viru Maakohus · First instance

Narva linn, Vahtra tn 4 korteriühistu · 80175765

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: applicant — Narva linn, Vahtra tn 4 korteriühistu; interested person XX; association’s representative XX

How it started · editorial summary

After a report of payment, the association waived its demand. The court accepted the waiver, terminated the case and ordered a 150 euro fee refund to the association.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The court terminated the case on the apartment association Narva linn, Vahtra tn 4’s application after it waived the demand. Interested person XX reported payment of the debt, and both participants signed the application to end the case. The association also sought refund of the excess fee paid and half the proper application fee. The participants agreed not to seek costs from each other. The ruling does not give the initial debt amount or detailed objections to charges. The court checked and accepted the waiver and ended proceedings without deciding the original demand. Each participant was left to bear their own costs; no inter-party reimbursement was awarded. The association paid a 175 euro fee on applying, whereas the required fee was 50 euros. The ruling of 15 May 2023 ordered refund of a 125 euro overpayment and 25 euros due to the waiver, totalling 150 euros. A budget refund must be distinguished from recovery against the interested person. Actual refund is not confirmed.

Outcome of this decision

Accept the association’s waiver and terminate proceedings. Leave costs to participants, with no mutual reimbursement. Refund the association a 150 euro fee.
Translation of an anonymised, abridged excerpt from Estonian
2. The parties shall bear their own procedural costs. There are no reimbursable procedural costs.
First instance
Case 2-23-110738Source: Riigi Teataja ↗

Narva linn, Hariduse tn 26 korteriühistu · 80218606

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

How it started · editorial summary

The settlement distinguishes ordinary interest from consequences of breaching instalments.

· Court orderViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-23-110738/3Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Instalments and different interest conditions

Court order · Viru Maakohus · First instance

Narva linn, Hariduse tn 26 korteriühistu · 80218606

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: applicant — Narva linn, Hariduse tn 26 korteriühistu; debtor XX — party to the settlement

How it started · editorial summary

The settlement distinguishes ordinary interest from consequences of breaching instalments.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The court approved an instalment settlement between Narva linn, Hariduse tn 26 korteriühistu and XX for acknowledged management charges and other payments and terminated proceedings. The settlement includes reimbursement of 32.50 euros of the association’s state fee, equal monthly instalments and a separate final payment. The order gives no detailed objections to the charges. Interest of 0.02% per day on unpaid management charges and other payments applies from 1 November 2023. Breach of the schedule makes the whole obligation immediately payable, with interest of 0.02% per day on the entire obligation from 1 April 2023. These are different conditions; the court did not establish a breach. Other costs remain with each participant. A state-budget refund of 32.50 euros in payment-order fees was refused; this does not cancel the debtor’s agreed reimbursement of that portion. Subsequent performance is not established.

Outcome of this decision

Settlement approved and proceedings terminated. The separate interest conditions remain; the state-fee refund was refused.
Translation of an anonymised, abridged excerpt from Estonian
2. Terminate proceedings in civil case no. 2-23-110738.
First instance
Case 2-23-2145Source: Riigi Teataja ↗

Narva linn, A. Puškini tn 65 korteriühistu · 80183173

Water and seweragePipes, risers and sewerageDamage and insuranceLeaks and floodingCause and proof of damageAmount of compensationInsurance payment and insurer’s claimApartment association bills, payments and debtsLate-payment interest and consequences of delay

How it started · editorial summary

The insurer obtained an award for reimbursement of compensation paid for apartment damage. The court linked the damage to the condition of a shared water riser under the association’s management.

· RulingViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-23-2145/3Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

A. Puškini tn 65: association ordered to reimburse insurer for a shared riser leak

Ruling · Viru Maakohus · First instance

Narva linn, A. Puškini tn 65 korteriühistu · AB Lietuvos draudimas · 80183173 · 110051834

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: applicant — AB Lietuvos draudimas, insurer; interested person — Narva linn, A. Puškini tn 65 korteriühistu; owner XX — recipient of the insurance payment; insurer’s representative XX

How it started · editorial summary

The insurer obtained an award for reimbursement of compensation paid for apartment damage. The court linked the damage to the condition of a shared water riser under the association’s management.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The court awarded AB Lietuvos draudimas 596 euros in damages and interest against the apartment association Narva linn, A. Puškini tn 65. It linked the apartment damage to a leak in the shared water riser whose condition the association was obliged to monitor. The insurer compensated owner XX for ceiling damage after the leak and brought the transferred claim against the association for the amount paid. Evidence included the policy, damage notice, photographs, inspection report, repair estimate and payment order. The association received court materials but did not respond or object within the deadline. The court found the source of the water in the shared riser. Ordinary upkeep and repair of that part of the building are performed through the association. It found the riser’s condition improper and causation proved: if properly maintained, water would not have entered the insured apartment. The association supplied no evidence rebutting those findings or justifying breach of duty. The decision rests on assessment of the materials, not merely the absence of a response. The ruling of 3 March 2023 awarded 596 euros in compensation, 38 euros in accrued interest and further statutory interest on 596 euros from 8 February 2023 until performance. The insurer also sought the costs of applying to court. The court reduced reimbursable representative time: the case did not require the three and a half hours claimed. It awarded 290 euros in costs, comprising a 50 euro fee and 240 euros in legal assistance, with statutory interest after entry into force. The award does not confirm that the association has already transferred those sums.

Outcome of this decision

Grant the insurer’s application. Award 596 euros in damages, 38 euros in accrued interest and statutory interest on 596 euros from 08.02.2023 until performance against the association. Allocate costs to it; award 290 euros and statutory interest on costs after entry into force.
Translation of an anonymised, abridged excerpt from Estonian
2. Order Narva linn, A. Puškini tn 65 korteriühistu to pay AB “Lietuvos draudimas“ 596 euros in damages and 38 euros in late-payment interest that has fallen due.
First instance
Case 2-22-138703Source: Riigi Teataja ↗

Narva linn, Rahu tn 28a korteriühistu · 80158560

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

How it started · editorial summary

Two persons acknowledged a common joint and several obligation. The court approved the agreement, but performance of the schedule with already elapsed deadlines is not confirmed.

· RulingViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-22-138703/7Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Rahu tn 28a: court approved two debtors’ agreement with the association

Ruling · Viru Maakohus · First instance

Narva linn, Rahu tn 28a korteriühistu · 80158560

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: applicant — Narva linn, Rahu tn 28a korteriühistu; interested person XX — party to the agreement; other interested person XX — party to the agreement; association’s representative XX

How it started · editorial summary

Two persons acknowledged a common joint and several obligation. The court approved the agreement, but performance of the schedule with already elapsed deadlines is not confirmed.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The court approved Narva linn, Rahu tn 28a korteriühistu’s agreement with two interested persons XX and terminated the case. The participants acknowledged a common obligation for building maintenance, other payments and court costs; the act does not set out detailed objections to charges. The two persons are jointly and severally liable: the common unpaid amount may be sought from either, but cannot be recovered in full twice. The schedule provides three equal payments with deadlines before the ruling. The document does not say whether they had been made by approval. Breach makes the obligation immediately enforceable and requires payment of earlier interest specified in the agreement and further interest of 0,02% per day on unpaid maintenance expenses and other payments. The court did not find that these conditions had occurred. Each party bears other costs; the association was awarded a 32,50 euro fee refund. The act states that the parties waived appeals. Approval does not confirm schedule performance or the current balance.

Outcome of this decision

Admit the application, approve the agreement on two persons’ joint and several obligation and three equal payments, and terminate the case. Breach provides for immediate performance, earlier interest and further interest of 0,02% per day on unpaid maintenance expenses and other payments. Leave other costs to participants; refund the association a 32,50 euro fee.
Translation of an anonymised, abridged excerpt from Estonian
3. Terminate proceedings in civil case No 2-22-138703.
First instance
Case 2-22-126130Source: Riigi Teataja ↗

Narva linn, Viru tn 19 korteriühistu · 80522114

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

How it started · editorial summary

The instalment settlement provides a conditional interest concession.

· Court orderViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-22-126130/5Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Instalments and conditional suspension of interest

Court order · Viru Maakohus · First instance

Narva linn, Viru tn 19 korteriühistu · 80522114

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: applicant — Narva linn, Viru tn 19 korteriühistu; debtor XX — party to the settlement; applicant’s contractual representative XX

How it started · editorial summary

The instalment settlement provides a conditional interest concession.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The court approved a settlement between Narva linn, Viru tn 19 korteriühistu and XX for instalment payment of acknowledged management-charge debt, interest and costs, and terminated proceedings. Equal monthly instalments and a separate final payment were agreed; current bills remain payable separately on time. The order gives no detailed objections to the calculation. Proper compliance with the schedule suspends interest on the principal from 22 September 2022. Breach removes the concession and interest resumes from that same date. The court did not establish subsequent breach or performance. Agreed costs of 132.50 euros comprise 32.50 euros in state fees and 100 euros in legal costs. Other costs remain with each participant; a separate state-fee refund of 32.50 euros to the association was ordered. Reduction of the appeal period to three days was refused as unavailable in this procedure.

Outcome of this decision

Instalments approved and proceedings terminated; suspension of interest depends on compliance. Appeal period not reduced.
Translation of an anonymised, abridged excerpt from Estonian
2. Terminate proceedings in civil case no. 2-22-126130.
First instance
Case 2-22-134627Source: Riigi Teataja ↗

Narva linn, Rahu tn 14 korteriühistu · 80015323

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

How it started · editorial summary

The court approved monthly instalments for an acknowledged obligation while preserving the possibility of appeal.

· RulingViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-22-134627/3Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Rahu tn 14: debt instalments approved until January 2026

Ruling · Viru Maakohus · First instance

Narva linn, Rahu tn 14 korteriühistu · 80015323

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: applicant — Narva linn, Rahu tn 14 korteriühistu; debtor XX — party to the agreement; association’s representative XX

How it started · editorial summary

The court approved monthly instalments for an acknowledged obligation while preserving the possibility of appeal.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The court approved Narva linn, Rahu tn 14 korteriühistu’s agreement with XX to pay the acknowledged obligation in instalments and terminated the case. It did not grant the request to exclude appeals. After the agreement was submitted, the case was transferred from payment order proceedings to Viru Maakohus for approval. The acknowledged obligation includes building maintenance, other payments, interest and court costs; the act contains no separate examination of objections to charges. The schedule provides equal monthly payments and a separate last payment. Unpaid maintenance costs and other payments carry interest of 0,02% per day. Breach of the schedule makes the entire agreed obligation immediately payable; the court did not establish that a breach had actually occurred. Each party bears other costs; the request for a partial fee refund is decided separately after entry into force. The court considered waiver of appeal impermissible under the procedure applied. Performance of the schedule and the later balance are not confirmed.

Outcome of this decision

Approve monthly instalments with a separate final payment and terminate the case. Provide interest of 0,02% per day on unpaid maintenance costs and other payments, with immediate full payment on breach of schedule. Leave other costs to participants and decide the fee refund separately. Refuse to exclude appeals.
Translation of an anonymised, abridged excerpt from Estonian
2. Terminate proceedings in civil case No 2-22-134627.
First instance