The court refused Pavel Grudinin to suspend the recovery of 1.1 billion rubles from him
As follows from the information in the file of arbitration cases, on Tuesday the district court rejected Grudinin's appeal against the ruling of the same court, issued in July. The Director of the state farm asked to suspend the execution of the decision to recover such a large amount from him until the cassation appeal against the judicial acts of two instances is considered.
In his appeal to the district court, Grudinin pointed out that the execution of the appealed judicial acts will lead to its bankruptcy, which "will cause significant difficulties in the main economic activity and adverse social consequences" for the state farm. The court, however, found no grounds for suspension. Consideration of Grudinin's cassation on the merits of the dispute is scheduled for September 14.
The arbitration court of Moscow region in October 2019 partially satisfied the claim of the shareholders of the State farm Ivan, Tamara and Olga Markin, Alexander and Dmitry Eroshkin and Nina Solodovnikova, as well as Irina Grudinina, who later joined them, the former wife of Pavel Grudinin, declared in the interests of the agricultural enterprise.
The plaintiffs demanded to recover in favor of the state farm about 1.1 billion rubles of real damage and about 1 billion rubles of lost profits. In their opinion, the damage was caused by the introduction of two land plots of the state farm with a market value of about 1.1 billion rubles to the authorized capital of TT development in 2008 to pay for a 48% stake in the company with a nominal value of 29 million rubles.
This deal was declared illegal in 2018 by the arbitration courts of three instances, as well as the Supreme court of Russia. The plaintiffs calculated the lost profit as the cost of land use rights from 2008 to 2018, when it was owned by TT development. As a result, the first instance recovered only real damage, and this decision was upheld by the Tenth arbitration court of appeal.
The claim to Grudinin was initially completely rejected by the courts of two instances, and only in October 2019, the cassation instance sent the case for review, indicating that the fact of obvious inequality of the deal established in the first case was not taken into account: the market value of the land was 37 times higher than the nominal value of the 48% share in TT development received by the state farm. Then Irina Grudinina joined the dispute as a co-plaintiff.
Цитаты дня
