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 2-17-6287

Narva linn, Tallinna mnt 46 korteriühistu · 80170555

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

How it started · editorial summary

The association did not respond to the company’s claim; the court declared two claims absent by default and awarded the company court costs.

· JudgmentViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-17-6287/6Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Tallinna mnt 46: default judgment declared no company debt for interest and legal services

Judgment · Viru Maakohus · First instance

OÜ Peremaakler · Tallinna mnt 46 Korteriühistu · 11523072 · 80170555

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Claimant — OÜ Peremaakler; Defendant — Tallinna mnt 46 Korteriühistu

How it started · editorial summary

The association did not respond to the company’s claim; the court declared two claims absent by default and awarded the company court costs.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The court granted OÜ Peremaakler’s claim against Tallinna mnt 46 Korteriühistu by default. It declared that the company did not owe the association 2 614,55 euros in late-payment interest or 50 euros for legal services. It awarded the company 775 euros in court costs against the association, plus statutory interest on unpaid costs from entry into force until payment. The company bought an apartment at auction and became its owner in December 2016. It said the auction record showed no additional debts of the previous owner, but the association later issued an invoice including interest. The company considered the interest and legal services charge unjustified and sought a declaration that it had no duty to pay. The court admitted the claim on 9 May 2017, served the documents on the association on 11 May and the costs list on 13 June. It allowed 20 days to respond and warned of a default judgment. The association did not respond in time. The court granted the claim by default. The act contains no detailed objections from the association or separate examination of the lawfulness of each charge. The court found the requested 775 euros in costs justified; no objections to them had arrived either. The judgment is immediately enforceable. Declaring the two named claims absent does not mean those amounts are paid to the company: the monetary award concerns court costs and interest on them. Actual performance is not confirmed.

Outcome of this decision

Declare no debt owed by OÜ Peremaakler to the association for 2 614,55 euros in interest and 50 euros in legal services. Award the company 775 euros in costs against the association and statutory interest on the unpaid part from entry into force until performance. The judgment is immediately enforceable.
Translation of an anonymised, abridged excerpt from Estonian
3. The judgment is immediately enforceable.
Case 2-17-1783

Narva linn, V. Gerassimovi tn 4 korteriühistu · 80170236

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claimsLate-payment interest and consequences of delayObligations of multiple owners

How it started · editorial summary

Each defendant was assigned separate debt, interest and costs amounts; no joint and several recovery of the entire amount from either was ordered.

· JudgmentViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-17-1783/8Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Gerassimovi 4: different shares of debt and interest awarded against two defendants by default

Judgment · Viru Maakohus · First instance

Korteriühistu Gerassimovi 4 Narva · 80170236

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Claimant — Korteriühistu Gerassimovi 4 Narva; Defendants — two co-owners XX

How it started · editorial summary

Each defendant was assigned separate debt, interest and costs amounts; no joint and several recovery of the entire amount from either was ordered.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The court granted the apartment association Gerassimovi 4 Narva’s claim against two co-owners XX by default. Separate principal and accrued interest amounts were set for each according to ownership shares; further interest of 0,07% per day was awarded on each unpaid principal until payment. One defendant received the documents against signature; the other received them by placement in a mailbox. They were allowed 14 days to respond with a warning of a default judgment, but neither responded in time. The monetary obligations and state fee were assigned separately to each defendant, rather than jointly and severally. The text contains no detailed examination of individual charges. The judgment is immediately enforceable but does not confirm actual receipt of money.

Outcome of this decision

Award principal, accrued interest and a fee separately against each defendant XX. Further interest of 0,07% per day runs on the corresponding unpaid principal until payment. No joint and several recovery of the entire amount from either defendant was ordered. The judgment is immediately enforceable.
Translation of an anonymised, abridged excerpt from Estonian
6. The judgment is immediately enforceable.
Case 2-16-16692

Narva linn, Tallinna mnt 25, Tallinna mnt 27 korteriühistu · 80162159

Water and sewerageMeters and readingsCalculation of water chargesApartment association bills, payments and debtsBills and justification of chargesLate-payment interest and consequences of delayPayment accounting and set-offLimitation of claims

How it started · editorial summary

The owner challenged 53,16 euros as interest, but the court found that interest paid and instead identified a principal balance resulting from the order in which payments were applied.

· JudgmentViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-16-16692/16Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Tallinna mnt 25/27: owner’s requests for a finding of no debt and limitation rejected

Judgment · Viru Maakohus · First instance

KÜ Tallinna mnt 25/27 · 80162159

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Claimant — owner XX; Defendant — KÜ Tallinna mnt 25/27

How it started · editorial summary

The owner challenged 53,16 euros as interest, but the court found that interest paid and instead identified a principal balance resulting from the order in which payments were applied.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The court dismissed XX’s claim against KÜ Tallinna mnt 25/27: it did not declare that the 53,16 euro debt was absent or grant the alternative request to establish expiry of limitation. This decides the owner’s claim; it is not a new monetary award to the association. The dispute began with cold water charges. The owner believed payment should follow the readings after a verified meter was installed. The association continued charging under the earlier standard and agreed to recalculate in May 2012. XX considered that there was then no basis for interest; the limitation period for old claims had also expired. The association objected that the owner continued reducing various invoices unilaterally after recalculation. Payments were applied first to accrued late-payment interest and then to principal. The balance therefore extended beyond the earlier water dispute. The court examined invoices and a summary calculation and agreed with the association. The owner had not challenged the meeting decision on standard water charges, which remained binding until amended. Unilaterally reducing invoices caused payment delays for which the association could seek interest. The court also found it lawful to apply payments first to interest and then to principal. It concluded that the disputed interest had already been paid in that way, while 53,16 euros in maintenance costs remained unpaid. It rejected the argument that refusing to pay interest allowed the owner to change this order. It also found no justification for reducing or refunding interest already paid. The limitation request was rejected: the court proceeded from the relevant earlier obligations having already been performed through payments, making limitation inapplicable to them. Costs were allocated to XX; their amount will be determined separately after the judgment enters into force.

Outcome of this decision

Dismiss XX’s request for a declaration of no debt and the alternative limitation request. Leave the claimant’s own costs and the association’s costs to the claimant; their amount will be determined separately after entry into force.
Translation of an anonymised, abridged excerpt from Estonian
5. The court shall determine the monetary amount of procedural costs by a separate ruling after the judgment enters into force.
Case 2-16-19439

Narva linn, Tallinna mnt 42 korteriühistu · 80054903

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claimsLate-payment interest and consequences of delayBills and justification of chargesApartment association meetings and decisions

Latest prepared act · · № 2-16-19439/11

How it started · editorial summary

Refusal to accept the counterclaim was upheld, but lack of prospects was replaced as the reason by the existence of an identical dispute already pending.

Acts in this casePrepared acts: 1 · Unprepared stages: 1
· RulingTartu Ringkonnakohus · Appeal · № 2-16-19439/11Read actAppeal

Separate act page

Tallinna mnt 42: counterclaim refused because another case between the same parties was already pending

Ruling · Tartu Ringkonnakohus · Appeal

KÜ Tallinna mnt 42 · 80054903

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Original claimant and counterclaim defendant – KÜ Tallinna mnt 42; Original defendant, counterclaimant and appellant – XX

How it started · editorial summary

Refusal to accept the counterclaim was upheld, but lack of prospects was replaced as the reason by the existence of an identical dispute already pending.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The apartment association Tallinna mnt 42 claimed debt and late-payment interest from XX. XX filed a counterclaim seeking a declaration that general meeting decisions were void, meaning without legal effect from adoption. XX linked the charges to what he considered an unjustified increase in the apartment’s floor area in the calculations. The county court refused to accept the counterclaim as having no prospect of success: no specific challenged decisions had been identified. The circuit court upheld the refusal but substituted its basis. Case 2-14-62722 concerning recalculation and absence of debt was already pending between the same parties. The court found that the counterclaim substantially coincided with the subject matter and objective of that dispute. Refusal concerned resubmission of an already pending demand, rather than a finding that XX lacked a right to legal protection. The court referred to its judgment of 8 June 2017 in the other case, which set aside the county court judgment of 3 October 2016 and remitted the case for reconsideration. The present ruling states that shared-property expenses are allocated in proportion to the owner’s share; a departure requires agreement by all owners. Calculation issues can be addressed when the related demands are heard. The circuit court suggested considering joinder of the two cases but did not join them by this ruling. The association’s monetary demand was not decided on its merits. Requests to restore the deadline for challenging the meeting decisions and to gather evidence were left undetermined, as the court did not consider those decisions’ validity decisive for this dispute. Appeal costs were imposed on XX without a specified amount.

Outcome of this decision

Dismiss XX’s appeal; uphold the operative part of the ruling of 17 May 2017 with amended reasons. XX bears appeal costs. Neither the association’s monetary claim nor the validity of the meeting decisions was decided on its merits by this ruling.
Translation of an anonymised, abridged excerpt from Estonian
2. Dismiss XX’s appeal against the ruling.
Not prepared yet

· Case 2-16-19439 · Viru Maakohus · First instance

Case 2-17-4354

Narva linn, V. Gerassimovi tn 4 korteriühistu · 80170236

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

How it started · editorial summary

Relief from further late-payment interest depends on following the agreed schedule; the court approved the agreement and terminated proceedings.

· RulingViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-17-4354/8Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Gerassimovi 4: agreement approved for scheduled debt repayment by December 2017

Ruling · Viru Maakohus · First instance

KÜ Gerassimovi 4 Narva · 80170236

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Claimant – KÜ Gerassimovi 4 Narva; Defendant – XX

How it started · editorial summary

Relief from further late-payment interest depends on following the agreed schedule; the court approved the agreement and terminated proceedings.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The court approved the agreement between the apartment association Gerassimovi 4 Narva and XX for scheduled debt repayment by December 2017 and terminated proceedings. The agreed amount included principal, past and current late-payment interest, and costs. If the payment amounts and deadlines were followed, the association undertook not to charge further late-payment interest on the total agreed debt up to and including 25 December 2017. Breach of the schedule provides for immediate recovery of the full agreed debt and late-payment interest; this clause does not specify a further rate. Each bears its own remaining costs. A partial court fee refund is to be decided by a separate ruling after this ruling becomes final. These are agreed terms, rather than an independent judicial examination of the original justification for every charge; performance is not established.

Outcome of this decision

Approve the agreement on scheduled debt repayment and terminate the case. If the schedule is followed, no further late-payment interest accrues up to and including 25 December 2017; breach provides for immediate recovery of the agreed debt and late-payment interest. Each party bears its own remaining costs.
Translation of an anonymised, abridged excerpt from Estonian
2. Terminate proceedings in civil case No. 2-17-4354.
Case 2-14-62363

Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 40 korteriühistu · 80180370

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

How it started · editorial summary

Instead of a decision on the claim and counterclaim, the court approved a 3000 euro payment and mutual waiver of claims.

· RulingViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-14-62363/36Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Kangelaste 40 and FARKAM: mutual claims ended by a 3000 euro agreement

Ruling · Viru Maakohus · First instance

OÜ FARKAM · KORTERIÜHISTU KANGELASTE 40 · OÜ Mürin · 10176071 · 80180370 ·

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Claimant and counterclaim defendant — OÜ FARKAM; Defendant and counterclaimant — KORTERIÜHISTU KANGELASTE 40

How it started · editorial summary

Instead of a decision on the claim and counterclaim, the court approved a 3000 euro payment and mutual waiver of claims.

The dispute and the court’s decision

OÜ FARKAM brought a monetary claim against the apartment association Kangelaste 40, and the association brought a counterclaim for damages. The court approved an agreement and terminated the case without deciding the original claims on their merits. The causes of the debt and damage are not described in detail in this act. The association undertook to pay FARKAM 3000 euros within 12 months from entry into force of the ruling. By agreement, payment is directed to OÜ Mürin’s account. The act establishes no monthly schedule. If the entire amount or a part due is paid late, interest of 0,5% is provided for each day of delay. FARKAM waived its claims and the association waived its counterclaim. The parties confirmed that they had no mutual monetary or property rights claims arising from the circumstances described or similar grounds; their earlier relations were settled by the agreement, whose terms exclude new pecuniary or non-pecuniary claims based on the earlier circumstances. FARKAM may apply to a bailiff to enforce the ruling. The hearing scheduled for 25 May 2017 was cancelled. Each party bears its own costs; refund of the fee is to be decided by a separate ruling after the act enters into force.

Outcome of this decision

Approve the agreement, terminate the proceedings and cancel the hearing. The association pays 3000 euros within 12 months from entry into force of the act; late payment carries interest of 0,5% per day. Each party bears its own costs; refund of the fee is decided separately.
Translation of an anonymised, abridged excerpt from Estonian
2. Terminate the proceedings in civil case No 2-14-62363.
Case 2-17-4567

Narva linn, Kreenholmi tn 9 korteriühistu · 80258758

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

How it started · editorial summary

Personal service of the claim and the absence of a response led to a default award of debt, interest and the fee.

· JudgmentViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-17-4567/3Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

ÜHTEHOIDEV: maintenance debt and interest awarded by default

Judgment · Viru Maakohus · First instance

KORTERIÜHISTU ÜHTEHOIDEV · 80258758

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Claimant — KORTERIÜHISTU ÜHTEHOIDEV; Defendant — XX

How it started · editorial summary

Personal service of the claim and the absence of a response led to a default award of debt, interest and the fee.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The apartment association ÜHTEHOIDEV sought payment from XX for utilities and building maintenance. The claim documents were served personally on the defendant, but no response arrived in time. The court granted the claim by default under §407 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Principal and accrued late-payment interest were awarded against the defendant. The association was also awarded a 100 euro state fee; the court will determine legal costs separately. The judgment is immediately enforceable without security. A detailed factual description and reasons are absent: the act does not disclose every charge or substantive objections. It does not confirm actual payment.

Outcome of this decision

Grant the claim by default: award principal, accrued interest and a 100 euro fee. Legal costs are to be determined separately. The judgment is immediately enforceable without security.
Translation of an anonymised, abridged excerpt from Estonian
3. The default judgment is immediately enforceable without security.
Case 2-16-107184

Narva linn, A. Puškini tn 51 korteriühistu · 80189448

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

How it started · editorial summary

Proceedings were terminated following acceptance of waiver after payment; XX must pay a further 525 euros in costs.

· RulingViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-16-107184/23Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Puškini tn 51: waiver accepted after payment of debt, with costs awarded separately

Ruling · Viru Maakohus · First instance

KÜ Puškini tn 51 · 80189448

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Claimant — KÜ Puškini tn 51; Defendant — XX

How it started · editorial summary

Proceedings were terminated following acceptance of waiver after payment; XX must pay a further 525 euros in costs.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The apartment association Puškini tn 51 brought a debt and late-payment interest claim against XX. On 21 February 2017, the association reported payment of the debt and asked the court to accept waiver of the claim, terminate the case and award 525 euros in costs. The court accepted the waiver and terminated the proceedings. Because the defendant satisfied the claim only after it was filed, costs were allocated to the defendant. The association was awarded a combined 525 euros in state fees and legal assistance against XX; the act contains no breakdown between those types of costs. The defendant submitted no objections to the list of costs. The court explained that, after termination, the association cannot bring a claim against the same defendant with the same subject matter and grounds again. The ruling was ordered to be served publicly through Ametlikud Teadaanded; service is deemed to occur 15 days after publication of the extract. The act does not confirm that this publication actually took place.

Outcome of this decision

Accept the association’s waiver of the claim and terminate the case. Award the association 525 euros in costs against XX. Order public service of the ruling.
Translation of an anonymised, abridged excerpt from Estonian
1. Accept KÜ Puškini tn 51’s waiver of the claim.
Case 2-16-19099

Narva linn, Kreenholmi tn 44 korteriühistu · 80158672

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

How it started · editorial summary

Two defendants are jointly and severally liable for utility debt, interest and costs awarded by default.

· JudgmentViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-16-19099/7Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Kreenholmi 44: debt and interest awarded jointly and severally against two defendants by default

Judgment · Viru Maakohus · First instance

KORTERIÜHISTU Kreenholmi 44 · 80158672

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Claimant — KORTERIÜHISTU Kreenholmi 44; Two defendants — XX

How it started · editorial summary

Two defendants are jointly and severally liable for utility debt, interest and costs awarded by default.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The apartment association Kreenholmi 44 brought a claim against two defendants XX for utilities and building maintenance. The claim documents were delivered to their mailboxes. No responses arrived in time, and the court granted the claim by default. Principal and accrued late-payment interest were awarded against the defendants jointly and severally. The association may seek the unpaid awarded amount from either within the common obligation, but cannot recover the entire amount twice. Court costs were also allocated to the defendants jointly and severally. The judgment is immediately enforceable without security. A detailed factual description and reasons are absent; the act itself does not confirm actual payment.

Outcome of this decision

Grant the claim by default: award principal and accrued interest against the two defendants jointly and severally. Costs are also allocated to them jointly and severally. The judgment is immediately enforceable without security.
Translation of an anonymised, abridged excerpt from Estonian
3. The default judgment is immediately enforceable without security.
Case 2-17-1939

Narva linn, Kreenholmi tn 33 korteriühistu · 80175469

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

How it started · editorial summary

Failure to respond to the served claim led to a default award of debt and late-payment interest, including continuing accrual.

· JudgmentViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-17-1939/4Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

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

Judgment · Viru Maakohus · First instance

KORTERIÜHISTU KREENHOLMI 33 · 80175469

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Claimant – KORTERIÜHISTU KREENHOLMI 33; Defendant – owner XX

How it started · editorial summary

Failure to respond to the served claim led to a default award of debt and late-payment interest, including continuing accrual.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The apartment association Kreenholmi 33 brought a claim against owner XX for utility and maintenance charges. The defendant was duly served with the documents and allowed 14 days to respond, with a warning about a default judgment. No response arrived; the court treated the claimant’s factual allegations as admitted under the default procedure. The court awarded the principal, accrued late-payment interest and litigation costs. Further late-payment interest of 0,07% per day accrues on unpaid principal until repayment. Accrued and continuing late-payment interest are distinct parts of the result. The judgment is immediately enforceable. The award itself does not confirm actual payment.

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 against XX. The judgment is immediately enforceable.
Translation of an anonymised, abridged excerpt from Estonian
6. The judgment is immediately enforceable.
Case 2-16-119304

Narva linn, Uusküla tn 17 korteriühistu · 80054990

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claimsLate-payment interest and consequences of delayHeatingCalculation and allocation of heating charges

How it started · editorial summary

The default judgment awarded debt and interest; it did not separately determine the lawfulness of the alterations.

· JudgmentViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-16-119304/8Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Majak: outstanding charges and further late-payment interest awarded by default

Judgment · Viru Maakohus · First instance

KÜ Majak · 80054990

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Claimant — KÜ Majak; Defendant — owner XX

How it started · editorial summary

The default judgment awarded debt and interest; it did not separately determine the lawfulness of the alterations.

The dispute and the court’s decision

The apartment association Majak (now — Narva linn, Uusküla tn 17 korteriühistu) sought payment of debt from owner XX, linking it in part to charges for additional heating following a change to the layout. This describes the association’s position: the act contains no detailed examination of the defendant’s objections. The original payment order application was transferred from Pärnu Maakohus to Viru Maakohus because the documents could not be served. Principal, accrued interest and further interest were sought in ordinary claim proceedings. The claim documents were not served personally on the defendant. XX did not respond in time, and the court treated the claimant’s factual assertions as admitted under the default procedure. The claim was granted by default. Debt, accrued late-payment interest and further interest of 0,07% per day on principal until repayment were awarded against XX. Costs of 151,64 euros were also awarded. The judgment is immediately enforceable without security. The act does not separately determine the lawfulness of the alterations or the outcome of any municipal inspection.

Outcome of this decision

Grant the claim by default: award debt, accrued interest, further interest of 0,07% per day on principal until repayment and costs of 151,64 euros against XX. The judgment is immediately enforceable without security.
Translation of an anonymised, abridged excerpt from Estonian
6. The default judgment is immediately enforceable.
Case 2-16-5698

Narva linn, A. Puškini tn 13 korteriühistu · 80121083

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

Latest prepared act · · № 2-16-5698/28

How it started · editorial summary

The association appealed against refusal to accept for proceedings the claim; the circuit court confirmed the absence of international jurisdiction for an Estonian court.

Related prepared acts from this case are also shown.

Acts in this casePrepared acts: 3 · Unprepared stages: 1
· RulingTartu Ringkonnakohus · Appeal · № 2-16-5698/28Read actAppeal

Separate act page

Puškini 13: refusal to accept for proceedings debt claim upheld on international jurisdiction grounds

Ruling · Tartu Ringkonnakohus · Appeal

KÜ Puškini 13 · 80121083

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Claimant and appellant — KÜ Puškini 13; Defendant XX; Association’s representative XX

How it started · editorial summary

The association appealed against refusal to accept for proceedings the claim; the circuit court confirmed the absence of international jurisdiction for an Estonian court.

The dispute and the court’s decision

Tartu Ringkonnakohus dismissed the apartment association Puškini 13’s appeal against refusal to accept for proceedings a utility debt claim against XX. The existence of the debt was not examined on the merits: the court found that the dispute did not fall within the jurisdiction of an Estonian court under the international jurisdiction rules applied. The association sought payment of apartment expenses and late-payment interest. An earlier refusal to accept for proceedings the claim had been set aside and the matter remitted to the county court. On reconsideration, the county court again not accepted for proceedings, proceeding from the defendant’s residence in Russia. The association objected that the apartment was in Estonia, so in its view the claim could be heard there. It relied on rules concerning the location of property and the circuit court’s earlier ruling, and considered recovery through a foreign court excessively burdensome. The circuit court applied the Estonia–Russia legal assistance treaty then applicable to this dispute. It stated that an international treaty takes priority over domestic procedural rules. For this type of claim, the treaty links jurisdiction to the defendant’s residence; the court found no grounds to depart from that rule. The association was left to bear the appeal costs. Their monetary amount was not determined. The decision concerns the court’s jurisdiction in this case, rather than the merits of the debt.

Outcome of this decision

Dismiss the association’s appeal and uphold refusal to accept for proceedings the claim. The association bears appeal costs; the debt and interest were not determined on their merits.
Translation of an anonymised, abridged excerpt from Estonian
2. Leave the procedural costs incurred in the appeal against the ruling to KÜ Puškini 13.
· Court orderViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-16-5698/23Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Debt claim refused admission for lack of international jurisdiction

Court order · Viru Maakohus · First instance

KÜ Puškini 13 · 80121083

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Association — claimant; XX — defendant, owner

How it started · editorial summary

The dispute over building charges did not reach the merits because the court found an obstacle to international jurisdiction.

The dispute and the court’s decision

KÜ Puškini 13 (now — Narva linn, A. Puškini tn 13 korteriühistu). KÜ Puškini 13 sought unpaid management and utility charges from owner XX. Applying the Estonian-Russian legal assistance treaty cited in this order, the court noted that the defendant lived in Russia and had not given written consent to proceedings in Estonia. The association did not answer the court’s enquiry about sending translated documents through the competent Russian court. The court refused to admit the claim without deciding whether the debt existed.

Outcome of this decision

The claim was not admitted and the application and annexes are to be returned to the association, which bears all procedural costs. The fee may be refunded on the payer’s application.
Translation of an anonymised, abridged excerpt from Estonian
Return the statement of claim and its annexes to the claimant.
· Court orderTartu Ringkonnakohus · Appeal · № 2-16-5698/14Read actAppeal

Separate act page

Admission of a claim remitted for further efforts to locate and serve the defendant

Court order · Tartu Ringkonnakohus · Appeal

KÜ Puškini 13 · 80121083

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Association — claimant and appellant against the order; XX — defendant

How it started · editorial summary

The review concerned whether sufficient efforts to locate and serve the defendant preceded the refusal to admit the claim.

The dispute and the court’s decision

KÜ Puškini 13 (now — Narva linn, A. Puškini tn 13 korteriühistu). KÜ Puškini 13 challenged the refusal to admit its claim against XX for management and utility arrears. The first-instance court considered that proceedings could not take place in Estonia without the written consent of the defendant living abroad. Tartu Ringkonnakohus held that the defendant’s position on the place of proceedings remained unknown and reasonable ways of obtaining service information had not been exhausted. At the association’s request, the court could obtain property acquisition contracts containing contact details.

Outcome of this decision

The appeal against the order was granted and the Viru Maakohus order of 14 June 2016 was set aside. The case was remitted for a fresh decision on admitting the claim; no debt was awarded and jurisdiction was not finally resolved. Costs are to be allocated in the final decision.
Translation of an anonymised, abridged excerpt from Estonian
Set aside the Viru Maakohus order of 14 June 2016.
Not prepared yet

· Case 2-16-5698 · Viru Maakohus · First instance