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
2-19-131580

Narva linn, Tallinna mnt 21 korteriühistu · 80228958

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claims

Editorial summary

The former owner relied on repayment from auction proceeds; the court established only partial payment.

· RulingViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-19-131580/20Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Tallinna mnt 21: apartment sale did not repay the entire debt to the association

Ruling · Viru Maakohus · First instance

Narva linn, Tallinna mnt 21 korteriühistu · 80228958

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Applicant – Narva linn, Tallinna mnt 21 korteriühistu; Interested person – former owner XX

Editorial summary

The former owner relied on repayment from auction proceeds; the court established only partial payment.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The court awarded Narva linn, Tallinna mnt 21 korteriühistu the outstanding debt and 220 euros in litigation costs against former owner XX. XX believed the apartment’s auction sale had cleared the debt and did not separately dispute the amount charged. The court found that the bailiff had transferred only part of the arrears to the association. Documents confirmed the unpaid balance, and XX supplied no evidence that it had been repaid. The court explained that sale of an apartment in enforcement proceedings does not release the former owner from unpaid obligations arising before ownership transferred. The demand was considered in non-contentious proceedings, the special procedure for matters between owners and their association. The outstanding debt and costs were awarded: a 50-euro court fee and 170 euros for representative’s services, totalling 220 euros. Actual recovery of the award is not confirmed. This ruling does not establish total sale proceeds or settlements with other enforcement creditors.

Outcome of this decision

Grant the application: award the association the unpaid balance and 220 euros in litigation costs against former owner XX.
2-20-113940

Narva linn, Vahtra tn 2a korteriühistu · 80175127

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

Editorial summary

The settlement defined the debt amount and schedule but did not exclude appeal against the ruling.

· RulingViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-20-113940/5Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Vahtra 2a: court approved instalments and preserved the right to appeal

Ruling · Viru Maakohus · First instance

Narva linn, Vahtra tn 2a korteriühistu · 80175127

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Applicant — Narva linn, Vahtra tn 2a korteriühistu; Debtor — XX

Editorial summary

The settlement defined the debt amount and schedule but did not exclude appeal against the ruling.

The dispute and the court’s decision

Narva linn, Vahtra tn 2a korteriühistu sought debt from XX. After transfer from expedited payment order proceedings, the participants submitted an agreement. The court found it admissible and enforceable, approved it and terminated the case. XX acknowledged the agreed obligation, including management payments, late-payment interest and court costs. Monthly payments by the last day of each month and a separate final payment were established. Unpaid management expenses and other payments carry late-payment interest of 0,02% per day; breach of the schedule makes the entire obligation immediately enforceable. Each participant bears costs not provided for in the agreement. The fee refund is decided separately after entry into force. Although the participants waived appeals, the court explained that such waiver was impermissible in these non-contentious proceedings: the appeal procedure remained available. The act does not confirm performance.

Outcome of this decision

Approve monthly instalments and a final payment for the acknowledged obligation. Unpaid management expenses and other payments carry late-payment interest of 0,02% per day; on breach of the schedule the entire balance is immediately due. Terminate the case, leave other costs to participants and decide the fee refund separately. Preserve the right to appeal.
2-19-20166

Narva linn, Mõisa tn 2 korteriühistu · 80170213

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claims

Editorial summary

The no-debt application ended in an agreement and allocation of the applicant’s costs to the association.

· RulingViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-19-20166/31Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Mõisa 2: absence of debt confirmed by agreement

Ruling · Viru Maakohus · First instance

Narva linn, Mõisa tn 2 korteriühistu · 80170213

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Applicant — XX; Interested person — Narva linn, Mõisa tn 2 korteriühistu

Editorial summary

The no-debt application ended in an agreement and allocation of the applicant’s costs to the association.

The dispute and the court’s decision

Applicant XX sought a declaration of no debt to Narva linn, Mõisa tn 2 korteriühistu. The participants settled and requested approval. Viru Maakohus checked the agreement and documents, found the arrangement admissible and terminated proceedings. The participants confirmed under the agreement that XX owed no apartment management or utility debt to the association as of 30 November 2019. This is an agreed term approved by the court; the ruling does not separately examine which earlier charges were correct. The association undertook to pay the applicant’s 150 euros in legal costs and half the fee, 25 euros. The agreement totals 175 euros*, payable over six months at 29 euros* per month. The association bears its own costs. Each participant bears costs not listed in the agreement. The court additionally ordered half the fee paid, 25 euros, refunded to the applicant from the budget after entry into force. The court explained that following approval the participants cannot bring the same demand concerning the same subject matter against each other again. If the monetary obligation is not performed, the creditor may apply to a bailiff. The ruling does not confirm that the association has already transferred the agreed costs.

Outcome of this decision

Approve absence of debt as of 30 November 2019. The association undertakes to pay the applicant 175 euros* over six months at 29 euros* per month. Terminate proceedings; refund the applicant a 25 euro fee.
2-19-9699

Narva linn, Rakvere tn 20, Rakvere tn 20a, Rakvere tn 20b, Rakvere tn 20c korteriühistu · 80180335

Apartment association meetings and decisionsConvening meetings and advance noticeDocuments and informationInspection and copies of documentsBudget, management plan and ratesReporting and review of expenditure

Latest prepared act · · № 2-19-9699/41

Editorial summary

The court distinguished breach of the duty to send documents from a material breach making meeting decisions void.

Acts in this casePrepared acts: 2
· RulingTartu Ringkonnakohus · Appeal · № 2-19-9699/41Read actAppeal

Separate act page

Rakvere 20–20c: failure to email documents did not make meeting decisions void

Ruling · Tartu Ringkonnakohus · Appeal

Narva linn, Rakvere tn 20, Rakvere tn 20a, Rakvere tn 20b, Rakvere tn 20c korteriühistu · 80180335

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Applicant and appellant — XX; Respondent — Narva linn, Rakvere tn 20, Rakvere tn 20a, Rakvere tn 20b, Rakvere tn 20c korteriühistu

Editorial summary

The court distinguished breach of the duty to send documents from a material breach making meeting decisions void.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The circuit court dismissed XX’s appeal and upheld refusal to declare the meeting decisions void, meaning without effect from adoption. Applicant XX sought nullity of the general meeting decisions of 29 April 2019 of Narva linn, Rakvere tn 20, Rakvere tn 20a, Rakvere tn 20b, Rakvere tn 20c korteriühistu. The dispute concerned the annual report, repairs, management plan and reserve capital. The applicant alleged defective convening: notice and materials had not been sent to the email address previously supplied. The association replied that documents were available on noticeboards. The county court rejected the application. Tartu Ringkonnakohus examined the appeal on its merits and upheld that result. It confirmed that the association had to send notice and materials to the supplied address and had breached that duty. However, nullity follows from a material breach of convening rules, not every departure. Here the applicant knew of the meeting, the notice stated where and how to inspect materials, and the same documents had been on noticeboards in advance. The court found a real opportunity to examine and understand them without additional expense. Non-receipt by email therefore did not materially restrict rights. The circuit court separately clarified that attendance and voting alone do not cure a material breach or automatically approve the decisions. It dismissed the appeal and allocated appeal costs to the applicant; the county court will determine the amount after the final act enters into force.

Outcome of this decision

Dismiss XX’s appeal and uphold the county court ruling of 20 March 2020. The applicant bears appeal costs, with the amount set separately.
· Court orderViru Maakohus Narva kohtumaja · First instance · № 2-19-9699/34Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Meeting documents by email: a breach without nullity of the resolutions

Court order · Viru Maakohus Narva kohtumaja · First instance

Narva linn, Rakvere tn 20, Rakvere tn 20a, Rakvere tn 20b, Rakvere tn 20c korteriühistu · 80180335

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Applicant — XX; Person concerned — Narva linn, Rakvere tn 20, Rakvere tn 20a, Rakvere tn 20b, Rakvere tn 20c korteriühistu

Editorial summary

XX challenged resolutions because documents were not emailed. The court recognised the duty to send them but found no material obstruction to preparation or participation and refused the application.

The dispute and the court’s decision

XX sought a declaration that four resolutions of Narva linn, Rakvere tn 20, Rakvere tn 20a, Rakvere tn 20b, Rakvere tn 20c korteriühistu made on 29.04.2019 were void: those on the report, repairs, management plan and reserve capital. The complaint was that notice and documents had not been sent to the email address notified to the association. The association relied on noticeboards and its lack of a computer. The court found that XX had previously supplied an address. Notification before the new law entered into force did not remove the duty to use known contact details. The absence of a computer was not an excuse. It separately examined whether the breach materially affected participation in decision-making. In this case, documents were on noticeboards, XX knew about the meeting, could inspect drafts and acknowledged attending. Objection to taking the decisions at the meeting was not proved. The court therefore found no ground of nullity and refused the application. It did not examine the substantive legality of each resolution as a separate invalidation claim. Costs were imposed on XX, with their amount to be determined separately.

Outcome of this decision

The request to declare the 29.04.2019 resolutions void was refused. The court found a breach of the electronic-delivery duty but did not consider it sufficiently material on these facts to cause nullity. XX bears costs, with their amount determined separately.
2-18-1525

KORTERIÜHISTU NARVA KOOLIPÕIK · 80180559 · dissolved

Apartment association board and managementReorganisation and liquidation

Editorial summary

The court allowed the liquidator to use the association’s account to refund mistaken payments, with discharge after the payments. The bank had terminated the liquidator’s access after the association’s removal from the register.

· Court orderViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-18-1525/7Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Completion of association liquidation and refund of mistaken payments

Court order · Viru Maakohus · First instance

KORTERIÜHISTU NARVA KOOLIPÕIK · 80180559

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Entity in liquidation — KORTERIÜHISTU NARVA KOOLIPÕIK; Liquidator — XX; Former board member and records custodian — XX

Editorial summary

The court allowed the liquidator to use the association’s account to refund mistaken payments, with discharge after the payments. The bank had terminated the liquidator’s access after the association’s removal from the register.

The dispute and the court’s decision

In the liquidation of KORTERIÜHISTU NARVA KOOLIPÕIK, liquidator XX reported that the process was complete and the association had been removed from the commercial register. The court had previously appointed the liquidator and required a completion report. It confirmed removal from the register on 29.10.2018. Members mistakenly transferred maintenance payments to the association’s account. The bank terminated the liquidator’s access, so XX sought specific authority to refund the money. The court considered access necessary for returning those mistaken payments. Proceedings were discontinued because liquidation and removal were complete. XX was authorised to use the account to return members’ money, with discharge from liquidator duties after the payments. There were no reimbursable costs. The act does not establish that refunds actually occurred.

Outcome of this decision

Liquidation proceedings were discontinued. The liquidator was authorised to use the association’s account for refunds of mistaken payments and is to be discharged after making them. Actual refunds were not established. There were no reimbursable costs.
2-19-18809

Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 43 korteriühistu · 80274757

Apartment association board and managementElection and replacement of the boardApartment association meetings and decisionsQuorum and repeat meetingsArticles of association and amendments

Editorial summary

The board registration dispute depended on which version of the articles determined the meeting quorum.

· RulingTartu Ringkonnakohus · Appeal · № 2-19-18809/8Read actAppeal

Separate act page

Kangelaste prospekt 43: refusal to amend board details set aside

Ruling · Tartu Ringkonnakohus · Appeal

Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 43 korteriühistu · 80274757

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Applicant and appellant — Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 43 korteriühistu

Editorial summary

The board registration dispute depended on which version of the articles determined the meeting quorum.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The circuit court set aside refusal to amend board details for the apartment association Kangelaste prospekt 43 and remitted the entry question to the registry department. Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 43 korteriühistu sought removal of two board members’ details and amendment of the end dates for three others. The registry department refused, considering that the deciding meeting lacked the required majority. The association objected that an earlier version of the articles had been applied. Tartu Ringkonnakohus allowed the appeal and remitted the entry question. It found that the 2011 meeting had adopted articles with a quorum, meaning the required attendance, of at least one third of members or representatives. A later meeting changed only the board’s term. Yet the 2016 application attached a text with wider changes, including the former requirement for more than half the members. Attaching that text without a corresponding meeting decision does not make those provisions part of the articles. The circuit court directed that the 2011 one-third rule be used for quorum and that the current version of the articles be established. The registry file also contained powers of attorney in Russian: the applicant must be given time to supply an Estonian translation by a sworn translator. The appeal ruling does not itself amend the board details or complete registration. It sets aside refusal and requires reconsideration using the proper articles and documents. Costs remain with the applicant; because the appeal succeeded, a fee refund may be requested separately.

Outcome of this decision

Allow the appeal and set aside the registry department’s refusal of 8 November 2019. Remit the entry question for reconsideration; this act does not make the entry itself.
2-18-130712

Narva linn, Tallinna mnt 42 korteriühistu · 80054903

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claimsLate-payment interest and consequences of delayBills and justification of charges

Editorial summary

After clarifying the extent of withdrawal, the association confirmed payment of the entire debt and requested an end to the case.

· RulingViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-18-130712/21Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Tallinna mnt 42: case terminated after confirmation of full payment

Ruling · Viru Maakohus · First instance

Narva linn, Tallinna mnt 42 korteriühistu · 80054903

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Applicant — Narva linn, Tallinna mnt 42 korteriühistu; Interested person — XX

Editorial summary

After clarifying the extent of withdrawal, the association confirmed payment of the entire debt and requested an end to the case.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The court terminated the apartment association Tallinna mnt 42’s case after confirmation of full payment and left costs to the association. Narva linn, Tallinna mnt 42 korteriühistu sought debt and late-payment interest from XX. The case began in expedited payment order proceedings, but the payment proposal could not be served within a reasonable time and the claim was transferred to Viru Maakohus. The association clarified the amount and charging period there. The association later withdrew the application, citing payment. The court noted that the first withdrawal concerned an earlier, smaller amount and did not explain the increased part. After a court query, on 28 February 2020 the association confirmed full payment and withdrawal of the entire application. The other participant made no objections. The court accepted the withdrawal and terminated proceedings without an award of the original debt. The ruling does not award debt again: termination was based on performance confirmed by the applicant. The association did not seek its costs from XX. The court left them to the applicant and found no costs reimbursable to the other participant. It decided to address the association’s request for refund of part of the fee in a separate ruling after entry into force. Neither the refund itself nor its amount is yet ordered in this ruling.

Outcome of this decision

Terminate proceedings. Leave costs to the association; there are no costs reimbursable to the other participant. Decide the fee refund in a separate act.
2-18-111283

Narva linn, Juuli tn 13 korteriühistu · 80145400

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claims

Editorial summary

Instead of debt recovery, the parties agreed that they had no mutual claims as at a specified date.

· RulingViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-18-111283/57Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

26. Juuli 13: agreement on absence of mutual claims

Ruling · Viru Maakohus · First instance

Narva linn, 26. Juuli tn 13 korteriühistu · 80145400

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Applicant – Narva linn, 26. Juuli tn 13 korteriühistu; Interested persons – XX and XX

Editorial summary

Instead of debt recovery, the parties agreed that they had no mutual claims as at a specified date.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The court approved an agreement that the apartment association 26. Juuli tn 13 and two participants XX had no mutual claims as at 31 December 2019 and terminated the case. Narva linn, 26. Juuli tn 13 korteriühistu sought arrears from two participants, XX and XX. They objected to the payment proposal and the demand was referred to Viru Maakohus. The court then clarified the procedure: a dispute over owners’ and the association’s rights and duties was to be resolved in non-contentious proceedings. The participants settled. Under the settlement, XX and XX had no debt to the association for apartment management expenses and utilities as at 31 December 2019. In turn, they had no claims against the association on that date. The court found the agreement permissible, approved it and terminated proceedings. It made no separate decision on the correctness of the initial charges. Each participant bears its own litigation costs except the state legal aid costs for XX and XX. The court left these with the state: the association had effectively waived its demand, and requiring other participants to repay the aid would be extremely unfair. The amount of aid is determined separately. The court ordered the association refunded 25 euros, half the proper court fee, and 236,90 euros in overpayment after the ruling becomes final. These are two independent grounds for refund: excess payment and settlement. The ruling orders reimbursement but does not confirm transfer of the money.

Outcome of this decision

Approve the settlement and terminate proceedings. State legal aid remains payable by the state; each bears its other costs. Refund the association 25 euros in court fees and 236,90 euros in excess payment.
2-16-17050

Narva linn, A. Puškini tn 19 korteriühistu · 80054978

Apartment association board and managementLiability of governing bodiesRepairs and shared propertyOrganisation and funding of repairsDamage and insuranceCause and proof of damage

Editorial summary

The association sought the cost of cable relocation from a former board member as damages, citing missing approvals. On rehearing, the court refused the claim, considering necessity and benefit to the building separately from formal decision-making.

· JudgmentViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-16-17050/69Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

A board member’s liability for relocation of electrical cables

Judgment · Viru Maakohus · First instance

Narva linn, A. Puškini tn 19 korteriühistu · 80054978

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Claimant — Narva linn, A. Puškini tn 19 korteriühistu; Defendant, former board member — XX

Editorial summary

The association sought the cost of cable relocation from a former board member as damages, citing missing approvals. On rehearing, the court refused the claim, considering necessity and benefit to the building separately from formal decision-making.

The dispute and the court’s decision

Narva linn, A. Puškini tn 19 korteriühistu sought 7200 euros from former board member XX for moving electrical cables from the facade to the basement. It alleged that the works were not properly approved and served only certain owners. XX relied on unsafe old cables and the interests of the whole building. An earlier award had been reversed on appeal and the case remitted. The court examined witnesses, the cables’ condition, photographs and connection records. It found the need for works due to unsafe wiring proved and noted the benefit to the shared building’s safety. Separate connections to premises did not themselves exclude common interests. However, the court also said that time between ordering and performance allowed the matter to be put to a general meeting, and board discussion did not replace required documentation. The court considered the existence of damage and benefit from the works separately. It did not automatically equate all expenditure with proved loss merely because decision-making was inadequately documented. The claim was dismissed. Costs were imposed on the association, with 1995 euros awarded to XX for legal assistance under the operative part. Actual payment of awarded costs was not established.

Outcome of this decision

The association’s 7200 euros damages claim was dismissed. It bears costs and must pay XX 1995 euros under the operative part. This does not mean the court approved the formal handling of every decision.
2-19-5769

Narva linn, Kreenholmi tn 33 korteriühistu · 80175469

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

Editorial summary

The association proved unpaid charges; the court determined debt, late-payment interest and costs separately.

· RulingViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-19-5769/10Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Kreenholmi 33: debt, late-payment interest and litigation costs awarded

Ruling · Viru Maakohus · First instance

Narva linn, Kreenholmi tn 33 korteriühistu · 80175469

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Applicant – Narva linn, Kreenholmi tn 33 korteriühistu; Interested person – owner XX

Editorial summary

The association proved unpaid charges; the court determined debt, late-payment interest and costs separately.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The court granted Narva linn, Kreenholmi tn 33 korteriühistu’s demand against owner XX for building maintenance and utility arrears, accrued late-payment interest and litigation costs. The participant received the papers but gave no position and did not dispute the amounts. The court examined ownership, the articles, meeting decisions on payments and charging documents. On that basis it recognised the owner’s duty to contribute to expenses and found the arrears established. Continuing late-payment interest on unpaid principal was awarded at the changing statutory rate, rather than the fixed daily percentage proposed by the applicant. Statutory late-payment interest on the awarded litigation costs accrues from the ruling’s finality. Litigation costs totalled 179,50 euros and included the court fee, representative’s assistance and document translation. The ruling confirms an award, rather than actual receipt of money.

Outcome of this decision

Award debt, accrued late-payment interest and 179,50 euros in litigation costs against XX. Continuing interest on unpaid principal accrues at the statutory rate; interest on costs runs from the ruling’s finality until payment.
2-19-118009

Narva linn, Mõisa tn 2 korteriühistu · 80170213

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claims

Editorial summary

The association did not supply the grounds and evidence for its monetary demand required by the court.

· RulingViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-19-118009/6Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Mõisa 2: debt application refused admission for lack of grounds

Ruling · Viru Maakohus · First instance

Narva linn, Mõisa tn 2 korteriühistu · 80170213

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Applicant – Narva linn, Mõisa tn 2 korteriühistu; Named debtor – XX

Editorial summary

The association did not supply the grounds and evidence for its monetary demand required by the court.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The court refused to accept the debt application by the apartment association Mõisa tn 2 because it had not supplied the grounds requested. Narva linn, Mõisa tn 2 korteriühistu sought a monetary debt from XX. In expedited payment order proceedings, the payment proposal could not be served on the debtor, and the case was referred to Viru Maakohus. The court required the association to put the demand in proper form and substantiate it within 14 days. The ruling was served, but the necessary documents did not arrive in time. The court sent a further requirement to provide a reasoned application with evidence or state that continuation was unnecessary. It warned that non-compliance would result in refusal to accept the application. Again, no reply arrived. The payment order materials did not establish the components of the debt or circumstances underlying the demand. The court therefore refused acceptance. Neither the existence of debt nor XX’s obligation to satisfy the monetary demand was examined on the merits. Litigation costs were left with the association. No costs were reimbursable to another participant. The court explained the procedural consequence: following such refusal, the application is deemed not filed and the claim never pending before the court. The ruling determines whether the papers were suitable for hearing, rather than confirming or disproving the debt.

Outcome of this decision

Refuse to accept the application. Costs remain with the association; the monetary demand was not decided on its merits.
2-16-13377

Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 44 korteriühistu · 80146002

Contracts and servicesWorks contracts and designQuality and acceptance of worksRepairs and shared propertyRoof and atticDamage and insuranceDamage caused during repairsAmount of compensationLeaks and flooding

Latest prepared act · · № 2-16-13377/130

Editorial summary

After the contractor’s failed repair, the association engaged another contractor and sought reimbursement.

Acts in this casePrepared acts: 2
· JudgmentTartu Ringkonnakohus · Appeal · № 2-16-13377/130Read actAppeal

Separate act page

Kangelaste 44: contractor must reimburse correction of roof defects

Judgment · Tartu Ringkonnakohus · Appeal

Korteriühistu KANGELASTE 44; Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 44 korteriühistu · Osaühing IMHOTEPKOMP · 80146002 · 11482887

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Claimant – Korteriühistu KANGELASTE 44; Defendant and appellant – Osaühing IMHOTEPKOMP

Editorial summary

After the contractor’s failed repair, the association engaged another contractor and sought reimbursement.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The circuit court upheld the award of 1 500 euros against Osaühing IMHOTEPKOMP in favour of the apartment association KANGELASTE 44 for remedying roof defects, changing the reasons in part. Korteriühistu KANGELASTE 44 sought 1 500 euros in damages from Osaühing IMHOTEPKOMP after replacement of 17 roof ventilation pipes. The association alleged that the contractor damaged roofing around the pipes, causing leaks, and attempted repairs with bitumen mastic did not cure the defects. Another company was engaged for repairs and a building audit commissioned. The contractor argued that it was not given sufficient time or opportunity to remedy the work and that the expenses were excessive. The county court granted the claim. Tartu Ringkonnakohus upheld the 1 500-euro award, clarifying its legal reasoning and assessment of the amount. Expert materials and witness testimony supported defects in both the original work and attempted repair. Failed remedial work was a fundamental breach of contract. The association therefore did not have to give the contractor yet another additional deadline and could engage another contractor to remedy the defects. The circuit court found 1 143,84 euros for remedial work and 360 euros for the audit justified. The total established was 1 503,84 euros, but the association sought only 1 500 euros and that was awarded. Another company’s later, cheaper estimate did not prove the actual cost of the relevant repairs. Appeal costs were imposed on IMHOTEPKOMP; the county court will quantify them after the judgment becomes final. The judgment confirms the contractor’s compensation obligation, rather than an actual payment to the association.

Outcome of this decision

Dismiss IMHOTEPKOMP’s appeal and uphold the association’s 1 500-euro award. Amend the reasoning in part. The contractor bears appeal costs, to be quantified separately.
· JudgmentViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-16-13377/118Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Defective roof works: recovery of rectification costs

Judgment · Viru Maakohus · First instance

Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 44 korteriühistu · OÜ IMHOTEPKOMP · OÜ Alakki · 80146002 · 11482887 ·

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Claimant and customer — Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 44 korteriühistu; Defendant and contractor — OÜ IMHOTEPKOMP

Editorial summary

The association sought 1500 euros from a contractor for defective replacement of roof pipes. The court found defects in both the original and warranty works and awarded the full amount claimed.

The dispute and the court’s decision

Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 44 korteriühistu, additionally named Korteriühistu KANGELASTE 44, sought 1500 euros from OÜ IMHOTEPKOMP for rectifying defective work. The contractor replaced 17 roof pipes; the work was accepted and paid for. Leaks later appeared. The association notified the defects and the contractor began warranty repairs, but the association stopped them as technically unsuitable and engaged OÜ Alakki. The court assessed an audit, court-appointed expert evidence, testimony and photographs. It found unsuitable components and inadequate sealing that allowed moisture beneath the roof covering. Video of proper technique on another site did not prove it had been used on this building. Both the original work and attempted repair were found deficient. The contractor had been given an opportunity to remedy defects. Absence of the formal record required by the contract did not negate written notices and repairs begun. However, the court excluded the part repaired by another firm before the contractor was notified. Later rectification and audit costs supported compensation. The claim was granted within the 1500 euros requested. Procedural costs were imposed on the contractor, with their amount to be fixed separately.

Outcome of this decision

OÜ IMHOTEPKOMP must pay the association 1500 euros within the amount claimed. It bears its own and the association’s procedural costs, the latter to be fixed separately. Permission to appeal was granted.