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 2-25-124523Source: Riigi Teataja ↗

Narva linn, Linda tn 1 korteriühistu · 80180424

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claimsInstalments and payment schedules

How it started · editorial summary

The schedule does not establish payment; the settlement takes effect when the order becomes final.

· Court orderViru Maakohus Narva kohtumaja · First instance · № 2-25-124523/3Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Linda tn 1: instalments and shortened appeal period

Court order · Viru Maakohus Narva kohtumaja · First instance

Narva linn, Linda tn 1 korteriühistu · 80180424

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: applicant — Narva linn, Linda tn 1 korteriühistu; person concerned — debtor XX

How it started · editorial summary

The schedule does not establish payment; the settlement takes effect when the order becomes final.

The dispute and the court’s decision

Narva linn, Linda tn 1 korteriühistu and debtor XX submitted a settlement following the start of expedited payment-order proceedings. The court approved it before non-contentious proceedings began and discontinued the case. The acknowledged obligation covers utility and management-charge arrears and agreed costs; the association waived other claims. Payment is spread over 28 months, with early payment permitted. Some initial dates precede the order, but it does not establish performance. Full or partial delay in an instalment makes the entire unpaid balance recoverable in enforcement proceedings. Full performance leaves no mutual claims from this case. The settlement takes effect when the approving order becomes final; a separate effectiveness clause was removed. By agreement, the appeal period was shortened to two days from service. Costs outside the settlement remain with each participant.

Outcome of this decision

The settlement was approved and proceedings discontinued; breach of the 28-month schedule permits recovery of the balance.
Translation of an anonymised, abridged excerpt from Estonian
3. Discontinue the civil proceedings.
First instance
Case 2-25-128001Source: Riigi Teataja ↗

Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 12 korteriühistu · 80175498

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

How it started · editorial summary

The court approved an acknowledged obligation with instalments and conditional late-payment interest.

· Court orderViru Maakohus Narva kohtumaja · First instance · № 2-25-128001/3Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Kangelaste prospekt 12: instalments and consequences of breaching settlement

Court order · Viru Maakohus Narva kohtumaja · First instance

Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 12 korteriühistu · 80175498

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: applicant — Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 12 korteriühistu; person concerned XX — debtor, party to the settlement; applicant’s representative XX

How it started · editorial summary

The court approved an acknowledged obligation with instalments and conditional late-payment interest.

The dispute and the court’s decision

Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 12 korteriühistu sought management charges and late-payment interest in expedited payment-order proceedings. After service of the payment proposal, debtor XX and the association submitted a written settlement. The claim was transferred from Pärnu Maakohus to Viru Maakohus, which approved the settlement before starting to examine the underlying debt application and discontinued the case. The acknowledged obligation includes debt, accrued late-payment interest, a state fee of 25 euros and legal costs of 166.80 euros. Payment was deferred into seventeen monthly instalments of varying amounts. Breach of the schedule makes the entire obligation immediately payable; upon breach, the association may also claim late-payment interest of 0.02% per day solely on the principal specified in the settlement, running from 1 March 2026. Costs outside the settlement remain with each party. The order does not establish payment of future instalments.

Outcome of this decision

The settlement was approved and proceedings discontinued. Breach triggers immediate payment and conditional late-payment interest.
Translation of an anonymised, abridged excerpt from Estonian
3. Discontinue the civil proceedings.
First instance
Case 2-20-144847Source: Riigi Teataja ↗

Narva linn, Pähklimäe tn 11 korteriühistu · 80545179

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claimsPayment accounting and set-offLate-payment interest and consequences of delayWater and sewerageCalculation of water chargesBills and justification of chargesMeters and readings

How it started · editorial summary

Water readings in the handover record changed part of the award, but a payment on earlier debt did not reduce this claim.

· Court orderViru Maakohus Narva kohtumaja · First instance · № 2-20-144847/25Read act

Separate act page

A company’s debt to an association and withdrawal of late-payment interest claim

Court order · Viru Maakohus Narva kohtumaja · First instance

Narva linn, Pähklimäe tn 11 korteriühistu · OÜ Peremaakler · 80545179 · 11523072

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Applicant — Narva linn, Pähklimäe tn 11 korteriühistu; Person concerned — OÜ Peremaakler

How it started · editorial summary

The association sought management and utility charges from OÜ Peremaakler. The appeal court later reduced the principal; the late-payment interest proceedings were discontinued following the association’s withdrawal.

The dispute and the court’s decision

Narva linn, Pähklimäe tn 11 korteriühistu sought management, heating and water charges from OÜ Peremaakler for 01.02.2020–07.10.2021. Following the company’s objection, the dispute continued outside expedited payment-order proceedings. The final claim was 1,147.44 euros. The association withdrew its claim for late-payment interest. The company disputed water charges on the ground of no consumption and raised the treatment of proceeds from the property’s sale. The first-instance court checked invoices, readings, handover records and approved tariffs. It found that the company had provided no specific alternative calculation, while the association had proved the composition and allocation of costs. It found that 350 euros obtained in enforcement had been applied to an earlier debt awarded in another case, rather than the period at issue here. The first-instance court awarded the principal and discontinued the withdrawn late-payment interest claim. On 29 January 2026, Tartu Ringkonnakohus reduced the award to 1,117.62 euros: water charges of 29.82 euros did not match the handover-record readings. Crediting 350 euros against the earlier debt was left unchanged. Costs in both instances were allocated 97% to OÜ Peremaakler and 3% to the association, with the amount to be determined separately. Discontinuance of the withdrawn late-payment interest claim remained unchanged.

Outcome of this decision

The original award was 1,147.44 euros. On 29 January 2026, Tartu Ringkonnakohus reduced it to 1,117.62 euros and dismissed the claim for 29.82 euros. The withdrawn late-payment interest claim was discontinued. Costs in both instances were allocated 97% to the company and 3% to the association, with the amount to be fixed separately.
Translation of an anonymised, abridged excerpt from Estonian
Accept the withdrawal by Narva linn, Pähklimäe tn 11 korteriühistu of the claim for late-payment interest on the principal debt for 01 February 2020 to 07 October 2021 and discontinue the proceedings in respect of that claim.
First instance
· Court orderTartu Ringkonnakohtu tsiviilkolleegium · Appeal · № 2-20-144847/38Read actAppeal

Separate act page

Pähklimäe tn 11: water-charge correction on OÜ Peremaakler’s appeal

Court order · Tartu Ringkonnakohtu tsiviilkolleegium · Appeal

Narva linn, Pähklimäe tn 11 korteriühistu · OÜ Peremaakler · 80545179 · 11523072

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: applicant — Narva linn, Pähklimäe tn 11 korteriühistu; person concerned and appellant against the order — OÜ Peremaakler; applicant representative — XX; company representatives — XX

How it started · editorial summary

Water readings in the handover record changed part of the award, but a payment on earlier debt did not reduce this claim.

The dispute and the court’s decision

Narva linn, Pähklimäe tn 11 korteriühistu sought 1147.44 euros in management charges from OÜ Peremaakler for 1 February 2020 until ownership ended on 7 October 2021; the association withdrew late-payment interest. The company disputed water charges and allocation of a 350-euro receipt. It appealed the order after the first-instance court allowed the principal in full. The appellate court admitted additional documents permissible in support of such an appeal. Final water readings in the handover record were lower than those used in the invoices. The excess 29.82 euros was therefore refused, leaving an award of 1117.62 euros. The court upheld the other charges. The 350-euro receipt discharged an earlier obligation established by another court order; the balance of that debt was not the balance claimed here. Discontinuance of the late-payment interest claim remained in force. Costs in both instances were allocated 97% to OÜ Peremaakler and 3% to the association. The first-instance court will quantify costs after the order becomes final. Performance of the award was not established.

Outcome of this decision

The appeal against the order was allowed in part: the award was reduced to 1117.62 euros and 29.82 euros refused; costs were reallocated.
Translation of an anonymised, abridged excerpt from Estonian
4.2. Allow the application in part.
Appeal
Case 2-25-123890Source: Riigi Teataja ↗

Narva linn, Vahtra tn 6 korteriühistu · 80181027

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

How it started · editorial summary

The court approved an acknowledged obligation with instalments and conditional late-payment interest.

· Court orderViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-25-123890/3Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Vahtra tn 6: instalments and consequences of breaching settlement

Court order · Viru Maakohus · First instance

Narva linn, Vahtra tn 6 korteriühistu · 80181027

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: applicant — Narva linn, Vahtra tn 6 korteriühistu; two joint and several debtors XX

How it started · editorial summary

The court approved an acknowledged obligation with instalments and conditional late-payment interest.

The dispute and the court’s decision

Narva linn, Vahtra tn 6 korteriühistu sought management charges and late-payment interest in expedited payment-order proceedings. After service of the payment proposal, two joint and several debtors XX and the association submitted a written settlement. The claim was transferred from Pärnu Maakohus to Viru Maakohus, which approved the settlement before starting to examine the underlying debt application and discontinued the case. The acknowledged obligation includes debt, accrued late-payment interest, a state fee of 25 euros and legal costs of 166.80 euros. Payment was deferred into twelve monthly instalments. Breach of the schedule makes the entire obligation immediately payable; upon breach, the association may also claim late-payment interest of 0.02% per day solely on the principal specified in the settlement, running from 1 January 2026. Costs outside the settlement remain with each party. The order does not establish payment of future instalments. Joint and several liability permits recovery from any debtor without recovering the same debt twice.

Outcome of this decision

The settlement was approved and proceedings discontinued. Breach triggers immediate payment and conditional late-payment interest.
Translation of an anonymised, abridged excerpt from Estonian
3. Discontinue the civil proceedings.
First instance
Case 2-25-14771Source: Riigi Teataja ↗

Narva linn, Joala tn 13, Joala tn 15, Kose tn 1a, Kose tn 3 korteriühistu · 80170785

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

How it started · editorial summary

The agreed costs are included in the schedule; delay permits recovery of the balance.

· Court orderViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-25-14771/10Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Joala–Kose: settlement on payment of arrears

Court order · Viru Maakohus · First instance

Narva linn, Joala tn 13, Joala tn 15, Kose tn 1a, Kose tn 3 korteriühistu · 80170785

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: applicant — Narva linn, Joala tn 13, Joala tn 15, Kose tn 1a, Kose tn 3 korteriühistu; person concerned — debtor XX

How it started · editorial summary

The agreed costs are included in the schedule; delay permits recovery of the balance.

The dispute and the court’s decision

Narva linn, Joala tn 13, Joala tn 15, Kose tn 1a, Kose tn 3 korteriühistu and debtor XX submitted a settlement concerning management charges and late-payment interest. The court found it permissible and capable of performance, approved it and discontinued proceedings. The acknowledged obligation includes 25 euros in agreed litigation costs. This is already included in the schedule and is not recoverable again separately. There are 27 payments of varying amounts, including higher seasonal payments; larger payments are permitted. An insufficient or late payment makes the entire unpaid balance recoverable through a bailiff. Full performance leaves no additional claims arising from this case. Other costs remain with each party; a refund of 25 euros, half the state fee, is ordered to the association after the order’s entry into force. The order does not establish performance of the schedule.

Outcome of this decision

A settlement with 27 payments and acceleration of the balance on breach was approved; proceedings were discontinued.
Translation of an anonymised, abridged excerpt from Estonian
2. Discontinue the civil proceedings.
First instance
Case 2-25-14770Source: Riigi Teataja ↗

Narva linn, Joala tn 13, Joala tn 15, Kose tn 1a, Kose tn 3 korteriühistu · 80170785

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claims

How it started · editorial summary

After full repayment, the association waived its application and requested half the fee back and the remainder from two debtors XX.

· Court ruling accepting waiver of an applicationViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-25-14770/13Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Joala–Kose association: termination after payment and joint and several costs

Court ruling accepting waiver of an application · Viru Maakohus · First instance

Narva linn, Joala tn 13, Joala tn 15, Kose tn 1a, Kose tn 3 korteriühistu · 80170785

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: applicant — Narva linn, Joala tn 13, Joala tn 15, Kose tn 1a, Kose tn 3 korteriühistu; two interested persons XX — jointly and severally obliged to reimburse costs

How it started · editorial summary

After full repayment, the association waived its application and requested half the fee back and the remainder from two debtors XX.

The dispute and the court’s decision

Narva linn, Joala tn 13, Joala tn 15, Kose tn 1a, Kose tn 3 korteriühistu sought debt from two individuals XX. During the case it supplied a payment document confirming full repayment. After a clarifying court question, it expressly waived its application, sought termination and refund of half the fee paid. It requested the other half against the debtors. On 16 December 2025 the court accepted the waiver and terminated proceedings. The basis was satisfaction during proceedings, confirmed by the payment document. The court did not award principal again or approve a settlement. Costs were allocated to both interested persons jointly and severally: one common 25 euro amount was awarded to the association, recoverable from either, rather than 25 euros from each. The court applied the costs rule for waiver after the other party satisfies the demand following the application to court. A further 25 euros, half the fee, is to be refunded to the association from the budget after entry into force. The refund and joint and several reimbursement of the remainder are two separate outcomes.

Outcome of this decision

Accept the waiver and terminate the case. Award 25 euros in costs jointly and severally against the two interested persons; refund the association a further 25 euros in fees after entry into force.
Translation of an anonymised, abridged excerpt from Estonian
2. Terminate the civil proceedings.
First instance
Case 2-25-124829Source: Riigi Teataja ↗

Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 12a korteriühistu · 80137948

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claims

How it started · editorial summary

In payment-order proceedings, the association and debtor XX agreed to discharge the acknowledged obligation in a single payment.

· Order approving a settlement and ending proceedingsViru Maakohus Narva kohtumaja · First instance · № 2-25-124829/3Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Kangelaste prospekt 12a: payment of debt in a single payment

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

Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 12a korteriühistu · 80137948

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Applicant — Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 12a korteriühistu; Person concerned, debtor — XX

How it started · editorial summary

In payment-order proceedings, the association and debtor XX agreed to discharge the acknowledged obligation in a single payment.

The dispute and the court’s decision

Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 12a korteriühistu began expedited payment-order proceedings against debtor XX. After service, the participants submitted a written agreement and the case was transferred to Viru Maakohus. On 25 November 2025, that court considered the settlement before examining the debt application itself. The debtor acknowledged the claim and agreed to reimburse 45 euros in costs: 25 euros in state fees and 20 euros in other procedural costs. The association waived other claims. A single payment by the agreed deadline was required; early performance was permitted. The court corrected the draft’s mistaken reference to instalments, because no instalments had been agreed. The revised clause makes the entire unpaid balance enforceable if the single payment is late in whole or in part. After performance, no mutual claims remain in the case. The court approved the permissible, enforceable settlement and ended proceedings. Each participant bears other costs; no further reimbursement was ordered. The agreed appeal period was two days from service, through Viru Maakohus to Tartu Ringkonnakohus.

Outcome of this decision

Approve the settlement on the debt and 45 euros in costs, payable in one payment by the agreed deadline; correct the reference to instalments. Full or partial delay makes the entire unpaid balance enforceable. End the proceedings.
Translation of an anonymised, abridged excerpt from Estonian
2.4. If payment specified in clause 2.2 is delayed, including in part, the entire unpaid debt is recoverable in enforcement proceedings (compulsory enforcement). […] 3. End the civil proceedings.
First instance
Case 2-22-9419Source: Riigi Teataja ↗

Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 3 korteriühistu · 80162521

Apartment association meetings and decisionsConvening meetings and advance noticeArticles of association and amendmentsVoting and representationHeatingCalculation and allocation of heating charges

How it started · editorial summary

After the nullity application succeeded, Rosehill challenged being left to bear its own costs. The main outcome concerning the articles was not at issue in this appeal.

· Court orderViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-22-9419/25Read act

Separate act page

An association’s new articles: notice of the meeting by email

Court order · Viru Maakohus · First instance

Osaühing Rosehill · Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 3 korteriühistu · 10972543 · 80162521

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Applicant — Osaühing Rosehill; Person concerned — Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 3 korteriühistu

How it started · editorial summary

Osaühing Rosehill challenged approval of the new articles because it had not received the notice or draft. The appeal court later changed only the allocation of procedural costs.

The dispute and the court’s decision

Osaühing Rosehill, which owned premises in the building, sought a declaration that the 29.04.2022 resolution approving new articles of Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 3 korteriühistu was void. It challenged notice of the meeting, allocation of costs and voting arrangements. The association said it had sent the notice and draft in advance to an email address known to it. The court found that the email had been sent to an account that was already closed. Sending the message did not prove its delivery. The company had received neither the notice nor the draft and could not prepare for the meeting. The court regarded this as a material defect in convening the meeting. The absence of a signature on the notice was not itself considered a material defect. The court found the meeting quorate but declared its resolution void because of the notice defect. It therefore did not examine the alternative objections to the substance of the articles. The court refused to stay proceedings pending the other dispute about the articles. Initially, each participant was left to bear its own costs. On 31 October 2025, however, Tartu Ringkonnakohus reversed only the costs part: the association must bear the costs of both the first-instance and appeal proceedings, with the amount to be determined separately by Viru Maakohus. The finding that the meeting resolution was void was not challenged or re-examined on appeal.

Outcome of this decision

The first-instance court declared the 29 April 2022 meeting resolution void and refused a stay. On 31 October 2025, Tartu Ringkonnakohus changed only the costs allocation: the association must bear the costs of both instances, with the amount to be determined separately. The finding of nullity was not re-examined.
Translation of an anonymised, abridged excerpt from Estonian
Declare the resolution adopted by the apartment owners’ general meeting of Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 3 korteriühistu on 29 April 2022 void.
First instance
· Appeal court ruling on court costsTartu Ringkonnakohtu tsiviilkolleegium · Appeal · № 2-22-9419/34Read actAppeal

Separate act page

Osaühing Rosehill: costs of challenge to apartment association Kangelaste prospekt 3’s decision allocated to association

Appeal court ruling on court costs · Tartu Ringkonnakohtu tsiviilkolleegium · Appeal

Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 3 korteriühistu · Osaühing Rosehill · 80162521 · 10972543

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: applicant and appellant against the ruling — Osaühing Rosehill; interested person — Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 3 korteriühistu; applicant’s representative XX; association’s representative XX

How it started · editorial summary

After the nullity application succeeded, Rosehill challenged being left to bear its own costs. The main outcome concerning the articles was not at issue in this appeal.

The dispute and the court’s decision

Osaühing Rosehill challenged Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 3 korteriühistu’s meeting decision of 29 April 2022 adopting new articles. It cited inadequate notice, documents sent to an old non-working email address and the articles’ content. The association said it sent necessary materials to the known address and complied with convening rules. On 9 May 2025, Viru Maakohus declared the decision void, meaning without legal effect from adoption, but left each participant to bear its own costs. It considered that the company contributed to non-notification by not supplying current details. Rosehill appealed only costs, arguing that the association knew the addresses used from ongoing correspondence. The association sought to retain the original allocation. The circuit court confined review to costs. Nullity had not been appealed and, according to this act, that part was already final. The court noted a substantive dispute over the meeting decision’s lawfulness. It is normally fair to allocate costs to the losing participant. The company had properly sought judicial protection because convening rules were breached and incurred costs that would not otherwise have arisen. The ruling of 31 October 2025 allowed the appeal, allocating first-instance and appeal costs to the association, with the amount to be set later by Viru Maakohus. It also explained that the fee for this appeal was 50 euros rather than the 70 paid; a request was needed for a 20 euro refund. This explanation is not a refund already made.

Outcome of this decision

Set aside the costs allocation in the ruling of 09.05.2025 and allocate costs to the association. Allow Rosehill’s appeal against the ruling and allocate its costs to the association too. Viru Maakohus will determine the amount after the final act enters into force.
Translation of an anonymised, abridged excerpt from Estonian
2. Allow Osaühing Rosehill’s appeal against the ruling. 3. Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 3 korteriühistu shall bear the procedural costs of the appeal against the ruling.
Appeal
Case 2-25-102277Source: Riigi Teataja ↗

Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 49 korteriühistu · 80162811

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

How it started · editorial summary

Owner XX and the association agreed on instalments after the debt claim was contested.

· Court orderViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-25-102277/28Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Instalments and waiver of accrued interest

Court order · Viru Maakohus · First instance

Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 49 korteriühistu · 80162811

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: applicant — Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 49 korteriühistu; person concerned, apartment owner — XX

How it started · editorial summary

Owner XX and the association agreed on instalments after the debt claim was contested.

The dispute and the court’s decision

Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 49 korteriühistu claimed management-charge arrears and interest from owner XX. Following an objection, the payment-order case was transferred and the claim amended. The court approved the participants’ settlement and terminated proceedings without deciding the original dispute on its merits. XX undertook to pay the debt and 750 euros of the association’s costs in twelve monthly instalments. The association waived accrued interest. Current bills must be paid separately on time. Delay in at least two instalments, or another breach of the instalment condition, allows immediate recovery of the balance and interest at 0.02%; the text specifies no period for that rate. Proper performance leaves no association claim for the period covered by the settlement. Other costs remain with the participants; the appeal period was reduced to one day after service.

Outcome of this decision

Settlement on instalments and costs approved with a waiver of accrued interest; proceedings terminated.
Translation of an anonymised, abridged excerpt from Estonian
2. Terminate proceedings in civil case no. 2-25-102277.
First instance
Case 2-25-120462Source: Riigi Teataja ↗

Narva linn, Mõisa tn 3 korteriühistu · 80152244

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claimsInstalments and payment schedules

How it started · editorial summary

Following an objection in payment-order proceedings, the association and XX submitted a clarified agreement acknowledging debt and setting instalments.

· Order approving a settlementViru Maakohus Narva kohtumaja · First instance · № 2-25-120462/7Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Mõisa tn 3: instalments for utility and management arrears

Order approving a settlement · Viru Maakohus Narva kohtumaja · First instance

Narva linn, Mõisa tn 3 korteriühistu · 80152244

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Applicant — Narva linn, Mõisa tn 3 korteriühistu; Person concerned, debtor — XX

How it started · editorial summary

Following an objection in payment-order proceedings, the association and XX submitted a clarified agreement acknowledging debt and setting instalments.

The dispute and the court’s decision

Narva linn, Mõisa tn 3 korteriühistu began payment-order proceedings against XX. XX objected in time and later corrected a missing signature. The case went to Viru Maakohus. The participants submitted a settlement and clarified it at the court’s suggestion. On 16 October 2025, the court approved the amended text before considering the debt application itself. It covers utility and management costs. XX acknowledged the principal and agreed to reimburse 45 euros in costs: 25 euros in state fees and 20 euros in other procedural costs. Twenty-two monthly payments and early repayment were permitted. Full or partial delay makes the entire unpaid balance enforceable. Regular payment of current costs remains required. After performance, no mutual claims remain in the case. The court found the terms permissible and enforceable and ended proceedings. Each bears other costs. The agreed appeal period was two days from service. Performance of the schedule is not established.

Outcome of this decision

Approve monthly payment of the principal and 45 euros in costs. Full or partial delay makes the entire unpaid balance enforceable. Current costs remain payable. End proceedings.
Translation of an anonymised, abridged excerpt from Estonian
2.5. If instalments specified in clause 2.2 are delayed, including in part, the entire unpaid debt is recoverable in enforcement proceedings (compulsory enforcement). […] 3. End the civil proceedings.
First instance
Case 2-25-117353Source: Riigi Teataja ↗

Narva linn, V. Gerassimovi tn 16 korteriühistu · 80218960

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claimsInstalments and payment schedules

How it started · editorial summary

The association and XX agreed on instalments and a specific term concerning breach of the schedule.

· Order approving a settlement and ending proceedingsViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-25-117353/3Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

V. Gerassimovi tn 16: debt and breach of the payment schedule

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

Narva linn, V. Gerassimovi tn 16 korteriühistu · 80218960

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Applicant — Narva linn, V. Gerassimovi tn 16 korteriühistu; Debtor — XX

How it started · editorial summary

The association and XX agreed on instalments and a specific term concerning breach of the schedule.

The dispute and the court’s decision

Narva linn, V. Gerassimovi tn 16 korteriühistu sought a debt from XX. After service of the payment proposal, the participants submitted an agreement. Pärnu Maakohus ended expedited payment-order proceedings and transferred the case to Viru Maakohus. On 16 September 2025, the court approved the acknowledgment of utility arrears and monthly payments over one year. Current bills remain payable. On breach, including failure to pay at least one instalment in full or in part, the agreement allows the association unilaterally to treat it as invalid. This operative part has no separate clause making the entire balance immediately recoverable. The court found the settlement permissible and enforceable and ended the case without deciding the original dispute on its merits. Participants bear costs outside the agreement; no additional reimbursement was awarded. An appeal was possible within 15 days of service. Subsequent payment is not established.

Outcome of this decision

Approve acknowledgment of the debt and monthly payments. Current bills remain payable. On breach, the association may unilaterally treat the agreement as invalid. End proceedings; participants bear costs outside the agreement.

A checked extract in this language is not yet available.

First instance
Case 2-24-11592Source: Riigi Teataja ↗

Narva linn, Tallinna mnt 56 korteriühistu · 80121574

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claimsBills and justification of chargesApartment association board and managementAuthority and representationContracts and servicesBuilding servicesLate-payment interest and consequences of delay

How it started · editorial summary

Principal and late-payment interest were paid during the case. Disputes remained over costs, representation and XX’s additional requests.

· Order on a debt claim and the owner’s additional applicationViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-24-11592/15Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Tallinna mnt 56: payment during proceedings, costs and representation

Order on a debt claim and the owner’s additional application · Viru Maakohus · First instance

Narva linn, Tallinna mnt 56 korteriühistu · 80121574

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Applicant — Narva linn, Tallinna mnt 56 korteriühistu; Person concerned, owner and addressee of the monetary claim — XX; Association’s representative — XX; Board member whose authority was challenged — XX

How it started · editorial summary

Principal and late-payment interest were paid during the case. Disputes remained over costs, representation and XX’s additional requests.

The dispute and the court’s decision

Narva linn, Tallinna mnt 56 korteriühistu sought management-cost arrears from XX. The amended claim covered principal and accrued late-payment interest. The association submitted calculations, supplier and participant invoices and resolutions setting charges. During proceedings, XX acknowledged and paid these sums but disputed liability for the association’s legal costs. XX also challenged the representative’s authority, requested recalculation of gas charges and correction of information in association documents. The court checked the register entry authorising a board member to act alone and another pending case concerning meeting resolutions. In this case, it accepted the register as the basis for representation. The entry had not changed, and litigation over the board member’s removal remained pending. The court found the calculation justified and noted that liability and the acknowledged amounts were no longer disputed. It nevertheless did not award the principal and accrued late-payment interest again, because they had been paid during proceedings. The operative part allows the application but expressly makes no monetary award for those sums because of performance. Requests to recalculate gas and correct document information were dismissed as outside the case’s subject. XX bears the association’s and XX’s own costs. Their amount is left for a separate order after entry into force. The association’s requested figure is not an amount already awarded; a new debt mentioned in its submissions was not awarded by this operative part either.

Outcome of this decision

Allow the association’s application but make no repeat award of principal and accrued late-payment interest because they were paid during proceedings. Dismiss XX’s requests for gas recalculation and correction of association documents as outside the case. Order XX to bear association costs, to be quantified separately.

A checked extract in this language is not yet available.

First instance