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
2-16-10352

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

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

Editorial summary

The court approved the debt and minimum monthly payment agreement and terminated the case.

· RulingViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-16-10352/29Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Kosmonaudi 9 / Linda 7: debt payments of at least 50 euros per month approved

Ruling · Viru Maakohus · First instance

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

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Claimant — Narva linn, Kosmonaudi tn 9, Linda tn 7 korteriühistu; Defendant — XX

Editorial summary

The court approved the debt and minimum monthly payment agreement and terminated the case.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The court approved a settlement between Narva linn, Kosmonaudi tn 9, Linda tn 7 korteriühistu and XX and terminated the debt and interest case. The agreed amount included principal, accrued interest and half the state fee. Monthly payments of no less than the agreed minimum are provided. This is a minimum contribution, not a prohibition on paying more. The court explained that an identical claim cannot be brought again; if the agreement is not performed, the association may apply to a bailiff. Each party bears its other costs. In addition to the half fee included in the defendant’s obligation, the association was awarded a separate 112,50 euro refund from the budget. The parties excluded the right to appeal. The act does not confirm payments or actual refund of the fee.

Outcome of this decision

Approve monthly payments of no less than the agreed minimum and terminate the case. Each party bears its other costs; order a refund to the association of 112,50 euros in fees from the budget.
2-17-9852

Narva linn, Turu tn 3 korteriühistu · 80228912

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

Editorial summary

The association reported payment and waived its claim; the court terminated proceedings.

· RulingViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-17-9852/14Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Nartur-3: debt case against two defendants ended after a report of payment

Ruling · Viru Maakohus · First instance

KÜ Nartur-3 · 80228912

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Claimant – KÜ Nartur-3; Defendants – XX and XX

Editorial summary

The association reported payment and waived its claim; the court terminated proceedings.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The court accepted KÜ Nartur-3’s waiver of its claim against XX and XX and terminated the debt case. The association explained that it was waiving the claim because the defendants had paid the debt. On 16 February 2018, the association asked to end proceedings following payment. The court accepted the waiver and explained its consequence: the same claim against the same defendants on the same grounds cannot be brought again. This ruling makes no new award of debt or late-payment interest. The result is termination following the association’s waiver based on its report that the demand had been met.

Outcome of this decision

Accept KÜ Nartur-3’s waiver and terminate proceedings on its claim against the two defendants XX.
2-16-8429

Narva linn, Kalda tn 6 korteriühistu · 80338842

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claims

Editorial summary

The company and association determined the debt by agreement and separately provided for passing on money if it arrives from bankruptcy proceedings.

· RulingViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-16-8429/43Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Kalda 6: payment of 2 265,06 euros and conditional transfer of funds received from bankruptcy proceedings approved

Ruling · Viru Maakohus · First instance

TSL Kinnisvara OÜ · Narva linn, Kalda tn 6 korteriühistu · 12652725 · 80338842

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Claimant and counterclaim defendant – TSL Kinnisvara OÜ; Defendant and counterclaimant – Narva linn, Kalda tn 6 korteriühistu; Mentioned bankruptcy trustee – XX

Editorial summary

The company and association determined the debt by agreement and separately provided for passing on money if it arrives from bankruptcy proceedings.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The court approved a settlement between TSL Kinnisvara OÜ and Narva linn, Kalda tn 6 korteriühistu and ended their mutual dispute over the amount of debt. The company had brought a declaratory claim and the association a counterclaim for payment. The parties agreed that the company’s debt as at 1 May 2017 was 2 265,06 euros. It is payable within three banking days after the agreement enters into force. The ruling does not disclose detailed initial calculations or objections. If the trustee in related bankruptcy proceedings transfers 618,35 euros to the association under the obligation specified in the agreement, the association must pass the received sum to the company within one calendar month of receipt. This condition depends on receiving payment; it does not confirm that the money arrived. The court considered the agreement permissible and enforceable and terminated the case. Each party bears its own costs, with no amounts reimbursable between them. Refund of half the court fee is to be addressed by separate rulings after finality; payment and refund are not established.

Outcome of this decision

Approve the agreement: TSL Kinnisvara OÜ pays the association 2 265,06 euros within three banking days after the agreement enters into force. If the association receives 618,35 euros from the trustee under the stated obligation, it passes that sum to the company within a calendar month of receipt. Terminate proceedings; each bears its own costs and court fee refunds are decided separately.
2-17-114918

Narva linn, Hariduse tn 26 korteriühistu · 80218606

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

Editorial summary

The court awarded debt and late-payment interest by default after no response to the served claim.

· JudgmentViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-17-114918/8Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Hariduse 26: utility debt, late-payment interest and court fee awarded by default

Judgment · Viru Maakohus · First instance

KÜ Hariduse 26 Narva · 80218606

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Claimant – KÜ Hariduse 26 Narva; Defendant – owner XX

Editorial summary

The court awarded debt and late-payment interest by default after no response to the served claim.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The apartment association Hariduse 26 Narva claimed building maintenance charges and late-payment interest from owner XX. The claim documents were served via the mailbox. The defendant was asked to respond in writing and warned of the consequences of not doing so, but no response or objections arrived in time. The court considered the claim legally justified and applied the default procedure, under which the claimant’s factual allegations are deemed admitted if no timely response is made. It awarded principal, accrued late-payment interest and the court fee, plus continuing late-payment interest of 0,07% per day on unpaid principal until repayment. The judgment is immediately enforceable without security. This does not confirm actual receipt of money by the association.

Outcome of this decision

Grant the claim by default: award principal, accrued late-payment interest, continuing late-payment interest of 0,07% per day on unpaid principal until repayment, and litigation costs. The judgment is immediately enforceable without security.
2-17-15411

Narva linn, Partisani tn 3a korteriühistu · 80152273

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

Editorial summary

The court approved instalments under the association and XX’s agreement: nine monthly payments. Proceedings were terminated.

· RulingViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-17-15411/3Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Partisani 3a: court approved nine payments under a debt agreement

Ruling · Viru Maakohus · First instance

KÜ Partisani 3a · 80152273

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: claimant — apartment association; defendant XX — party to the agreement; association’s representative XX

Editorial summary

The court approved instalments under the association and XX’s agreement: nine monthly payments. Proceedings were terminated.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The court approved KÜ Partisani 3a’s agreement with defendant XX to repay debt and costs and terminated the case. The parties agreed nine monthly payments. The association had filed a debt claim. The ruling does not set out detailed original grounds for charges or the defendant’s objections: the parties presented an agreed way to end the dispute. The terms cover principal, accrued interest and 195* euros in procedural costs. The court reviewed the agreement and documents, found no conflict with the law or good morals and approved the terms. If payments are delayed by more than two months, the association may immediately seek compulsory recovery through a bailiff. Each participant bears other costs not specified in the agreement. The act contains no information on performance of the schedule. Approval establishes the parties’ obligations but does not confirm receipt of money by the association.

Outcome of this decision

Approve the agreement to repay debt, interest and 195* euros in costs in nine monthly payments. If payments are more than two months late, the association may seek immediate compulsory recovery. Terminate proceedings; leave unspecified costs to the participants.
2-17-103173

Narva linn, Viru tn 20 korteriühistu · 80352766

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claims

Editorial summary

With no response, the court awarded the association debt and 50 euros in costs by default. The previously reimbursed portion of the fee was not awarded again.

· JudgmentViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-17-103173/12Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Viru 20: default award of 394,98 euros in debt and remaining fee costs

Judgment · Viru Maakohus · First instance

KÜ Viru 20 Narva · 80352766

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: claimant — apartment association; defendant XX — owner; association’s representative XX

Editorial summary

With no response, the court awarded the association debt and 50 euros in costs by default. The previously reimbursed portion of the fee was not awarded again.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The court granted KÜ Viru 20 Narva’s claim against owner XX by default, awarding the principal claim and 50 euros in costs. The defendant sent no response after public service of the documents. The association initially sought a payment order. After transfer to Viru Maakohus, it sought payment of the debt. According to the claim, the defendant owned an apartment and was a member of the association maintaining the building. The text contains no detailed objections from the defendant. The court stated that the ruling admitting the claim was served through Ametlikud Teadaanded on 12 October 2017. The defendant was given 14 days to respond and warned of a default judgment. No response arrived and the court applied the consequences of that non-participation. The short act contains no detailed analysis of charges. Of the 100 euro fee paid by the association, 50 euros had already been reimbursed outside court. The court awarded the remaining 50 euros as justified costs. The judgment was declared immediately enforceable and was also ordered served publicly because no service address or authorised recipient was known. Actual payment of the award and the date of publication of the judgment extract have not been checked.

Outcome of this decision

Grant the claim by default. Award the principal claim and 50 euros in costs against XX. The judgment is immediately enforceable; serve it publicly through Ametlikud Teadaanded, with service deemed complete 15 days after publication of the extract.
2-17-1621

Korteriühistu TALLINNA MNT 36

Rights in real propertyOwnership and register entriesApartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claimsPayment accounting and set-off

Editorial summary

The court distinguished current payments to the association from the enforcement debt.

· JudgmentViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-17-1621/54Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Tallinna mnt 36: challenging an auction and allocating payments

Judgment · Viru Maakohus · First instance

Korteriühistu TALLINNA MNT 36 ·

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: claimant — former owner XX; first defendant — bailiff XX; second defendant — purchaser XX; third defendant — Korteriühistu TALLINNA MNT 36

Editorial summary

The court distinguished current payments to the association from the enforcement debt.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The former owner XX sought invalidation of an apartment auction held to enforce a debt judgment in favour of Korteriühistu TALLINNA MNT 36, confirmation of ownership and return of the property. The defendants were bailiff XX, purchaser XX and the association. The claimant relied on direct payments to the association, lack of notice and incorrect valuation. The court dismissed the claim. The initial valuation had not been challenged in time and the court did not entertain that objection in this action. Correspondence showed that the claimant knew of the debt and the instalment conditions requiring payment to the bailiff, but had not complied. Payments to the association without specifying an obligation could be allocated to current invoices rather than the judgment debt. The court found that the enforcement claim remained unpaid when the auction ended; a later transfer did not alter that fact. The court found notice of the auction proper and no material breach warranting invalidation. Once the judgment becomes final, the prohibition on disposal entered for the claimant must be removed. Costs were placed on the claimant, with their amount and reimbursement to be decided separately. This judgment does not decide the association’s original debt claim afresh.

Outcome of this decision

Invalidation of the auction and the related claims were refused; the disposal restriction is removed after finality, with costs quantified separately.
2-17-652

Narva linn, Kivilinna tn 4 korteriühistu · 80228651

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claims

Latest prepared act · · № 2-17-652/17

Editorial summary

The court concluded bankruptcy of the property left after XX’s death and approved the trustee’s report. The association participated as a creditor and, according to the report, received only part of its recognised claim.

Acts in this casePrepared acts: 1 · Unprepared stages: 1
· RulingViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-17-652/17Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Estate bankruptcy concluded: association’s claim paid in part

Ruling · Viru Maakohus · First instance

Korteriühistu Daumani 4 · 80228651

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: applicant XX; debtor – XX’s estate; trustee XX; apartment association – creditor

Editorial summary

The court concluded bankruptcy of the property left after XX’s death and approved the trustee’s report. The association participated as a creditor and, according to the report, received only part of its recognised claim.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The court approved the trustee’s final report and concluded the bankruptcy of the estate: the property left after XX’s death. The apartment association Daumani 4 participated as a creditor, rather than the debtor. According to the report, its recognised claim was satisfied in part and a portion remained unpaid. This concludes the procedure after asset distribution; it is not a new judgment awarding the association the entire debt. No objections to the final report were filed. The court found no infringement of the debtor’s or creditors’ rights that would prevent approval and considered the report compliant with the law. The trustee was released from duties, and publication of a notice of conclusion in Ametlikud Teadaanded was ordered. The debtor or a creditor that had objected to the final report could appeal the ruling within 15 days of receipt.

Outcome of this decision

Approve the final report, conclude the estate bankruptcy and release the trustee. According to the report, the association’s claim was satisfied in part and a portion remained unpaid. Order publication of a notice of conclusion.
Not prepared yet

· Case 2-17-652 · Viru Maakohus · First instance

2-17-110027

Narva linn, Tallinna mnt 42 korteriühistu · 80054903

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claimsObligations of multiple owners

Editorial summary

The court ended the case after the association waived its claim because the debt had been paid. It awarded 137,50 euros* in costs jointly and severally against two defendants.

· RulingViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-17-110027/11Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Association waived its claim after debt payment; court awarded part of the costs

Ruling · Viru Maakohus · First instance

Tallinna mnt 42 Korteriühistu · 80054903

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: claimant – apartment association; two defendants XX – joint owners; association representative XX

Editorial summary

The court ended the case after the association waived its claim because the debt had been paid. It awarded 137,50 euros* in costs jointly and severally against two defendants.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The court accepted the apartment association Tallinna mnt 42’s waiver of its claim against two defendants XX and terminated proceedings. The waiver followed payment of the claimed debt after the association went to court. The defendants did not object. The court found the waiver permissible and explained that the same claim against the same defendants on the same grounds could not be brought again. As payment after filing caused the waiver, litigation costs were imposed on the defendants. They are jointly and severally liable: the association may seek the awarded sum from both together or either one within the overall total. The court awarded the association 137,50 euros*, half the fee paid for the payment order application and transition to ordinary civil proceedings. The other costs claimed were not considered necessary and justified. In particular, the association participated without a contractual representative, so expenses for drafting the claim, consultation and signing the agreement were not accepted; bank charges and separate payment order costs were also not awarded. The court fee refund question was left for a separate ruling after this ruling becomes final. The ruling itself does not confirm payment of the awarded litigation costs.

Outcome of this decision

Terminate proceedings following waiver of the claim. Award 137,50 euros* in litigation costs jointly and severally against the defendants; the court fee refund is to be decided separately.
2-17-110028

Narva linn, Tallinna mnt 42 korteriühistu · 80054903

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claims

Editorial summary

The court refused to accept the association’s debt claim for proceedings: a proper application, evidence and additional fee were not received in time.

· RulingViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-17-110028/3Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Association failed to remedy defects in its claim: court refused acceptance

Ruling · Viru Maakohus · First instance

Tallinna mnt 42 Korteriühistu · 80054903

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: claimant – apartment association; defendant – XX; association representative XX

Editorial summary

The court refused to accept the association’s debt claim for proceedings: a proper application, evidence and additional fee were not received in time.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The court refused to accept for proceedings the debt claim by the apartment association Tallinna mnt 42 because it had not complied with the requirement to remedy defects. The ruling states that, after payment order proceedings ended, the papers were referred to Viru Maakohus to continue as an ordinary civil claim. The court required a proper statement of claim and payment of an additional court fee within 14 days of service, warning of the consequences of non-compliance. The association’s representative received the requirement, but the defects were not remedied in time. The court noted that no proper application or evidence of the grounds for the claim had been submitted and the additional fee was unpaid. The claim was therefore not taken up for hearing. The court did not decide whether a debt existed or its amount. Following refusal, the application and attachments are returned to the claimant and are not sent to the defendant; under the rule cited, the application is deemed not filed and the claim never pending before the court. Litigation costs were left with the association. The ruling could be appealed to Tartu Ringkonnakohus through Viru Maakohus within 15 days of service.

Outcome of this decision

Refuse to accept the claim for proceedings because defects were unremedied and the additional fee unpaid; leave costs with the association. The debt was not examined on its merits.
2-17-7866

Narva linn, P. Kerese tn 15 korteriühistu · 80218285

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claims

Editorial summary

The court approved an agreement for the association to pay the electricity network company 365 euros by 31 December 2017. Proceedings were terminated.

· RulingViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-17-7866/13Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Kerese 15: court approved payment of 365 euros to an electricity network company

Ruling · Viru Maakohus · First instance

Osaühing VKG ELEKTRIVÕRGUD · KERESE 15 NARVA KORTERIÜHISTU · 10855041 · 80218285

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: claimant — electricity network company; defendant — apartment association; parties’ representatives XX

Editorial summary

The court approved an agreement for the association to pay the electricity network company 365 euros by 31 December 2017. Proceedings were terminated.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The court approved an agreement between VKG ELEKTRIVÕRGUD and the apartment association KERESE 15 NARVA and terminated the debt case. The association undertook to pay the company 365 euros no later than 31 December 2017. The parties reached the agreement at the hearing. The court checked that the agreement was compatible with the law and good morals, did not harm public or participants’ interests and could be performed. Each party bears its own court costs; no reimbursement of one party’s costs by the other was ordered. The claimant requested a refund of half the state fee. The court left this for a separate ruling after entry into force, so this ruling does not show that the fee was actually refunded. The court also explained that after termination the same claim against the same defendant on the same grounds cannot be brought again. The parties agreed a shortened appeal period of three days from service of the ruling. The act establishes the association’s agreed obligation but does not confirm actual payment of the 365 euros.

Outcome of this decision

Approve the agreement: the association pays VKG ELEKTRIVÕRGUD 365 euros no later than 31 December 2017. Terminate proceedings. Each party bears its own costs; refund of the fee will be decided in a separate ruling.
2-17-100639

Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 23 korteriühistu · 80171052

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

Editorial summary

The court approved payment of debt and costs to the association within the agreed period; it did not cancel one defendant’s separate obligation concerning state legal aid.

· RulingViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-17-100639/33Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Kangelaste 23: debt settlement approved; obligation to reimburse state legal aid retained

Ruling · Viru Maakohus · First instance

Korteriühistu Kangelaste 23 · 80171052

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Claimant – Korteriühistu Kangelaste 23; Defendants – XX and XX; One defendant’s representative XX under state legal aid

Editorial summary

The court approved payment of debt and costs to the association within the agreed period; it did not cancel one defendant’s separate obligation concerning state legal aid.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The court approved the settlement between Korteriühistu Kangelaste 23 and two defendants XX, terminating the debt and late-payment interest case. The defendants must pay the association the agreed arrears and 157,50 euros in litigation costs within the period set by the agreement. The parties signed the agreement on 20 September and submitted it to the court the following day. The ruling contains no detailed initial calculations or objections. The court considered the terms permissible and enforceable, approved them and explained the consequences of termination. If the obligations are not performed, the association may apply to a bailiff. Each participant bears its own remaining costs. The association was awarded a refund from the state budget of half the court fee, 137,50 euros. This refund is distinct from the costs the defendants undertook to pay under the agreement. Separately, one defendant requested release from reimbursing state legal aid. Aid had previously been granted on terms requiring reimbursement of 75% of its cost in one payment within six months after the lawyer’s fee was determined. The court retained that obligation, leaving the monetary amount for a separate ruling. The ruling records the agreed payments and the end of the dispute. It does not establish actual payment of the debt or costs or refund of the court fee.

Outcome of this decision

Defendants XX are to pay the association the agreed debt and 157,50 euros in costs within the agreed period. Approve the settlement and terminate the case; each bears its own remaining costs. Refund the association 137,50 euros in court fees from the state budget. One defendant’s obligation to reimburse state legal aid remains on the previous terms; the amount will be determined separately.