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 2-25-19185Source: Riigi Teataja ↗

Narva linn, Madise tn 6 korteriühistu · 80551777

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claimsLate-payment interest and consequences of delayBills and justification of chargesPayment accounting and set-offHeatingCalculation and allocation of heating chargesWater and sewerageCalculation of water charges

How it started · editorial summary

The owner’s silence did not replace review of invoice grounds, payments and late-payment interest.

· Court orderViru Maakohus Narva kohtumaja · First instance · № 2-25-19185/6Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Madise tn 6: review of charges and partial recovery

Court order · Viru Maakohus Narva kohtumaja · First instance

Narva linn, Madise tn 6 korteriühistu · 80551777

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: applicant — Narva linn, Madise tn 6 korteriühistu; person concerned — owner XX

How it started · editorial summary

The owner’s silence did not replace review of invoice grounds, payments and late-payment interest.

The dispute and the court’s decision

Narva linn, Madise tn 6 korteriühistu claimed management charges and late-payment interest from owner XX. The owner received the documents but did not respond. In non-contentious proceedings, the court independently examined the basis and amount: issuing invoices alone is insufficient. It established meeting resolutions setting rates, a valid management plan and supplier costs. Heating was allocated by floor area, water and gas by readings and supplier prices. A late increase for a new period was left unexamined because it followed the deadline and would require a fresh opportunity to respond. A separate application for the new period remains possible. The court checked allocation of two payments: without selection of a particular obligation, the statutory sequence applied, first costs and late-payment interest, then principal. Late-payment interest was checked using the exact statutory annual rate rather than the association’s rounded daily rates. Principal recovery was limited to the amount claimed although the calculated balance was higher. The original late-payment interest claim was partly refused; the remaining accrued late-payment interest and further statutory late-payment interest on unpaid principal from 22 August 2026 until payment were awarded. Costs were reduced from the 800 euros sought to 560 euros: a 50-euro fee and 510 euros for legal assistance. The late increase and some representative time were not reimbursed. The order does not establish performance of the award.

Outcome of this decision

The application was allowed in part; debt and late-payment interest were awarded and costs reduced. The late increase for a new period was left unexamined.
Translation of an anonymised, abridged excerpt from Estonian
2. Allow in part the application of Narva linn, Madise tn 6 korteriühistu dated 12.11.2025.
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.

Related prepared acts from this case are also shown.

· 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 2-24-11592Source: 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
Case 2-24-15880Source: Riigi Teataja ↗

Narva linn, Tallinna mnt 17 korteriühistu · 80170377

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claimsBills and justification of chargesObligations of multiple ownersHeatingCalculation and allocation of heating chargesRepairs and shared propertyOrganisation and funding of repairs

How it started · editorial summary

The court checked the basis of charges and limited the recovery period.

· Court orderViru Maakohus Narva kohtumaja · First instance · № 2-24-15880/39Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Proof of charges and joint and several recovery

Court order · Viru Maakohus Narva kohtumaja · First instance

Narva linn, Tallinna mnt 17 korteriühistu · 80170377

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: applicant — Narva linn, Tallinna mnt 17 korteriühistu; three persons concerned XX — jointly and severally liable owners; association representatives XX

How it started · editorial summary

The court checked the basis of charges and limited the recovery period.

The dispute and the court’s decision

Narva linn, Tallinna mnt 17 korteriühistu sought joint and several payment from three persons XX for services, repair-fund contributions, gas-equipment maintenance and heating. This is one common sum, not separate full recovery from each. The court checked the claim despite incomplete responses. Meeting decisions, a management plan, contracts and supplier invoices supported the charges; bills sent to the owner alone are insufficient. Payments were credited. Debt for 1 June 2023–30 April 2025 was proved; debt from May 2025 was not awarded. The application was allowed in part. Of 850 euros sought for legal costs, 300 euros were accepted for proved representative activities; with a 50-euro fee, 350 euros were awarded jointly and severally. Duplicate documents were removed from the file.

Outcome of this decision

Proven debt and 350 euros in costs awarded jointly and severally; later debt not awarded.
Translation of an anonymised, abridged excerpt from Estonian
2. Allow the application of Narva linn, Tallinna mnt 17 korteriühistu in part.
First instance
Case 2-22-14923Source: Riigi Teataja ↗

Narva linn, Vestervalli tn 6 korteriühistu · 80170874

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claimsBills and justification of chargesHeatingCalculation and allocation of heating chargesChanges to or disconnection from heatingApartment association meetings and decisionsArticles of association and amendmentsBudget, management plan and rates

How it started · editorial summary

The court granted owner XX’s request to recalculate maintenance and heating. The association did not substantiate exclusion of some premises from cost allocation.

· RulingViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-22-14923/25Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Vestervalli tn 6: court ordered recalculation of maintenance and heating charges

Ruling · Viru Maakohus · First instance

Narva linn, Vestervalli tn 6 korteriühistu · 80170874

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: applicant XX — owner; interested person — Narva linn, Vestervalli tn 6 korteriühistu; applicant’s representative XX; association’s representative XX

How it started · editorial summary

The court granted owner XX’s request to recalculate maintenance and heating. The association did not substantiate exclusion of some premises from cost allocation.

The dispute and the court’s decision

Owner XX obtained recalculation of charges from the apartment association Narva linn, Vestervalli tn 6. The court declared the maintenance and heating debt claimed against the owner absent as of 31 December 2024. The dispute concerned the floor area used to allocate common costs. The owner relied on the common ownership share and full premises area in the land register. The association excluded some non-residential premises and also accounted for some premises switching to independent heating. The applicant sought a declaration of no debt and an order to change the calculation. After clarification, the association accepted absence of maintenance debt but continued opposing the heating demands, relying on meeting decisions, articles and technical system features. The court examined the claims fully despite partial admission. For maintenance, the association did not prove a proper basis for allocating costs other than by common ownership shares. The court accepted the applicant’s calculation. For heating, it distinguished the ability to change the system from the basis for allocating costs afterwards. It did not find it proved that switching to independent heating itself required every owner’s consent. However, Vestervalli tn 6’s articles lacked sufficiently specific cost redistribution rules for this situation. The court did not accept meeting decisions as a substitute for the necessary agreement. It excluded another association’s articles as irrelevant to the dispute. The ruling of 30 June 2025 declared no maintenance debt of 724,07 euros or heating debt of 885,76* euros for August 2021 to December 2024 and ordered recalculation. Costs were allocated to the association, with the amount set separately. The court decided charges for that period, rather than awarding repayment of those sums to the applicant.

Outcome of this decision

Declare that applicant XX owes the association no maintenance debt of 724,07 euros or heating debt of 885,76* euros as of 31.12.2024 for August 2021 to December 2024. Require recalculation of those payments. Allocate costs to the association and determine the amount separately after entry into force.
Translation of an anonymised, abridged excerpt from Estonian
6. Narva linn, Vestervalli tn 6 korteriühistu shall bear the procedural costs.
First instance
Case 2-24-101553Source: Riigi Teataja ↗

Narva linn, Energia tn 3 korteriühistu · 80189425

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claimsBills and justification of chargesPayment accounting and set-offLimitation of claimsApartment association meetings and decisionsBudget, management plan and ratesApartment association board and managementAuthority and representationLate-payment interest and consequences of delay

How it started · editorial summary

XX challenged the service rate for non-residential premises and relied on limitation; the association sought payment under general-meeting resolutions.

· Court order in non-contentious proceedingsViru Maakohus Jõhvi kohtumaja · First instance · № 2-24-101553/29Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Energia tn 3: rates, allocation of payments and limitation

Court order in non-contentious proceedings · Viru Maakohus Jõhvi kohtumaja · First instance

Narva linn, Energia tn 3 korteriühistu · 80189425

Entry into force has not been reverified

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

How it started · editorial summary

XX challenged the service rate for non-residential premises and relied on limitation; the association sought payment under general-meeting resolutions.

The dispute and the court’s decision

Narva linn, Energia tn 3 korteriühistu sought management-cost arrears and late-payment interest from XX concerning non-residential premises. The association relied on general-meeting resolutions and argued that partial payment restarted limitation for the old debt. XX challenged the rate, relied on an individual arrangement with the board and pleaded partial limitation. The court found that ordinary payments specified particular months, so they could not arbitrarily be allocated to older debt. A separate payment marked “debt” discharged earlier obligations but did not acknowledge the whole balance. Unpaid 2020 charges were time-barred when proceedings began in January 2024. Other rate objections failed on the meeting records. The board could not set an individual rate contrary to the general resolution. The order cited the appellate court’s view that rates differing solely by natural- or legal-person status could make a resolution void. This operative part did not itself annul the rate resolution. The application was partly allowed: principal, accrued and further statutory late-payment interest until payment were awarded. XX bears 73% of association costs; clause5 awards 1283.12* euros. Statutory late-payment interest on costs also runs from entry into force. Actual payment is not established.

Outcome of this decision

Allow the application in part: award principal, accrued and further statutory late-payment interest until payment. XX bears 73% of association costs; clause5 awards 1283.12* euros. Statutory late-payment interest on costs also runs from entry into force.
Translation of an anonymised, abridged excerpt from Estonian
1. Allow the application of Narva linn, Energia tn 3 korteriühistu in part.
First instance
Case 2-24-11128Source: Riigi Teataja ↗

Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 10b korteriühistu · 80145534

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claimsBills and justification of chargesLate-payment interest and consequences of delayHeatingCalculation and allocation of heating chargesWater and sewerageCalculation of water charges

How it started · editorial summary

The association sought a new period’s arrears from former owner XX; no response followed service by public notice.

· Order awarding debtViru Maakohus Narva kohtumaja · First instance · № 2-24-11128/11Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Kangelaste prospekt 10b: the former owner’s arrears

Order awarding debt · Viru Maakohus Narva kohtumaja · First instance

Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 10b korteriühistu · 80145534

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Applicant — Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 10b korteriühistu; Person concerned, former owner — XX

How it started · editorial summary

The association sought a new period’s arrears from former owner XX; no response followed service by public notice.

The dispute and the court’s decision

Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 10b korteriühistu sought management and utility costs from former owner XX for a new period. An earlier case covered an earlier period; the present claim did not repeat that award. The association also sought late-payment interest, costs and retention of security for enforcement. Documents were served through official public notice and no response arrived by the deadline. The court decided the application in writing, emphasising its duty to verify legality and evidence despite the lack of objections. Failure to respond was not treated as an independent ground for recovery. The court held that loss of ownership does not release a former owner from obligations arising before transfer. It examined the amount and allocation of charges using register information, the articles, calculations, rates and supplier documents. The charges included maintenance, repair-fund contributions and utilities. The evidence was accepted as sufficient. For late-payment interest, the court stated that the articles alone could not establish a rate above the statutory rate and checked that the claim used the statutory rate. On 4 April 2025, it awarded principal, accrued late-payment interest and further statutory late-payment interest on principal until payment. The earlier security remained in place to enforce the order; it was not an additional monetary award. XX was also ordered to pay 489 euros in costs: two state fees, legal work and evidence. Statutory late-payment interest on costs runs from entry into force. Subsequent payment is not established.

Outcome of this decision

Award principal, accrued and further statutory late-payment interest on principal until payment against XX, plus 489 euros in costs with late-payment interest from entry into force. Retain the existing security for enforcement.
Translation of an anonymised, abridged excerpt from Estonian
1. Allow the application.
First instance
Case 2-24-104626Source: Riigi Teataja ↗

Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 12a korteriühistu · 80137948

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claimsBills and justification of chargesLate-payment interest and consequences of delayHeatingCalculation and allocation of heating chargesRepairs and shared propertyOrganisation and funding of repairs

How it started · editorial summary

After unsuccessful service in payment-order proceedings, the association submitted an amended application and additional evidence of charges; owner XX did not respond.

· Order on an application to recover debtViru Maakohus Narva kohtumaja · First instance · № 2-24-104626/17Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Kangelaste prospekt 12a: evidence supporting management charges

Order on an application to recover debt · 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, owner — XX

How it started · editorial summary

After unsuccessful service in payment-order proceedings, the association submitted an amended application and additional evidence of charges; owner XX did not respond.

The dispute and the court’s decision

Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 12a korteriühistu sought management-cost arrears from owner XX for the claimed period. Payment-order proceedings ended because the payment proposal could not be served, and the case went to Viru Maakohus. Documents were later served by public notice through the official publication; the owner filed no response or objections. The court required further evidence for each charge and clarification of repair-fund payments. The association supplied additional reasons, invoices, monthly calculations, its articles, meeting records, servicing contracts and heat-cost documents. The ruling therefore did not merely rely on the absence of a response. The court connected liability to membership, the allocation rules and meeting decisions. It accepted charges for servicing, heating and water circulation, a designated levy and gas-equipment servicing as proved and established the principal debt. On 21 March 2025, it awarded principal, accrued late-payment interest and further statutory late-payment interest until payment. XX was also ordered to pay 571.50 euros in costs, covering state fees, legal work and evidence, with late-payment interest from entry into force. The order requires service by public notice, deemed effective 15 days after publication of the extract. Actual subsequent service and the outcome of any appeal are not established by the text.

Outcome of this decision

Award principal, accrued and further statutory late-payment interest until payment against XX, plus 571.50 euros in costs with late-payment interest from entry into force. Direct service of the order by public notice.

A checked extract in this language is not yet available.

First instance
Case 2-22-10057Source: Riigi Teataja ↗

Narva linn, Madise tn 1, Madise tn 3, Malmi tn 3, Malmi tn 5 korteriühistu · 80152178

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claimsBills and justification of chargesPayment accounting and set-off

How it started · editorial summary

Owner XX challenged the association’s legal charges. The association admitted a 510-euro error, but disputes over other amounts and the present proceedings’ costs continued.

· Order on an application to establish absence of debtViru Maakohus Narva kohtumaja · First instance · № 2-22-10057/7Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Madise tn 1 and other buildings: erroneous legal charges on a bill

Order on an application to establish absence of debt · Viru Maakohus Narva kohtumaja · First instance

Narva linn, Madise tn 1, Madise tn 3, Malmi tn 3, Malmi tn 5 korteriühistu · 80152178

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Applicant, owner seeking a declaration of no debt — XX; Person concerned — Narva linn, Madise tn 1, Madise tn 3, Malmi tn 3, Malmi tn 5 korteriühistu; Applicant’s representative — XX; Association’s representative — XX

How it started · editorial summary

Owner XX challenged the association’s legal charges. The association admitted a 510-euro error, but disputes over other amounts and the present proceedings’ costs continued.

The dispute and the court’s decision

Applicant XX sought a declaration of no debt to Narva linn, Madise tn 1, Madise tn 3, Malmi tn 3, Malmi tn 5 korteriühistu. The dispute concerned legal costs and related charges, later other accounting dates and an alleged overpayment. The association admitted an erroneous 510-euro charge and corrected it but disputed the rest and considered litigation unnecessary. The court did not end the case merely because the final submissions reported no current debt. It distinguished whether charges were originally justified from later payment and examined the negative declaration claim. Of the 510 euros, 30 exceeded costs already awarded by a court and 480 related to another pending case. No obligation arose to pay these erroneous charges. Costs awarded by earlier rulings were different: the obligation originally existed and was subsequently performed. The court saw no basis for a separate declaration of its absence in the form requested. Further objections concerning the balance and overpayment were unproved after examination of the particular bill. On 28 February 2025, the application was partly allowed: the June notice showed no valid obligation for 510 euros as at 30 June 2022. This did not declare the absence of every obligation in later periods or award money against the association. Each participant bears its own costs, with no reimbursement.

Outcome of this decision

Allow the application in part: declare no debt for the 510-euro portion shown in the June notice as at 30 June 2022. Each participant bears its own costs, with no mutual reimbursement.
Translation of an anonymised, abridged excerpt from Estonian
1. Allow XX’s application in part.
First instance
Case 2-24-135369Source: Riigi Teataja ↗

Narva linn, Kivilinna tn 18 korteriühistu · 80015336

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claimsBills and justification of chargesLate-payment interest and consequences of delay

How it started · editorial summary

After an objection in payment-order proceedings, the association amended its claim; owner XX did not respond to the amended application received.

· Court orderViru Maakohus (Narva) · First instance · № 2-24-135369/8Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Kivilinna tn 18: proof of debt and costs of correcting the application

Court order · Viru Maakohus (Narva) · First instance

Narva linn, Kivilinna tn 18 korteriühistu · 80015336

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: Applicant — Narva linn, Kivilinna tn 18 korteriühistu; Person concerned, owner — XX

How it started · editorial summary

After an objection in payment-order proceedings, the association amended its claim; owner XX did not respond to the amended application received.

The dispute and the court’s decision

Narva linn, Kivilinna tn 18 korteriühistu sought arrears from owner XX through payment-order proceedings. After an objection, the case went to Viru Maakohus. The court twice allowed time for the association to correct its application. The owner received the amended papers but filed no further response. The court relied on the duty to pay under the management plan, invoices, account records and voting records setting rates. It accepted the calculation as proved and awarded the principal debt on 19 February 2025. Statutory late-payment interest on the principal runs only from the order’s entry into force until payment; the applicant specifically clarified that starting point before the ruling. The owner was also ordered to pay 175 euros in costs: 50 euros in state fees and 125 euros for necessary preparation of the application. A further 50 euros for correcting its defects was refused as a reimbursable cost: the other participant should not bear it. The lack of a response did not remove the court’s duty to check the evidence.

Outcome of this decision

Award the principal debt, statutory late-payment interest on it from entry into force until payment, and 175 euros in litigation costs against XX.
Translation of an anonymised, abridged excerpt from Estonian
3. Determine and award against XX, in favour of Narva linn, Kivilinna tn 18 korteriühistu, the applicant’s litigation costs of 175 euros.
First instance
Case 2-23-147941Source: Riigi Teataja ↗

Narva linn, Malmi tn 12 korteriühistu · 80250389

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

How it started · editorial summary

The court assessed the owner’s objections concerning heated area and repairs.

· Court orderViru Maakohus Jõhvi kohtumaja · First instance · № 2-23-147941/17Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Management charges and heating objections

Court order · Viru Maakohus Jõhvi kohtumaja · First instance

Narva linn, Malmi tn 12 korteriühistu · 80250389

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: applicant — Narva linn, Malmi tn 12 korteriühistu; person concerned XX — debtor

How it started · editorial summary

The court assessed the owner’s objections concerning heated area and repairs.

The dispute and the court’s decision

Narva linn, Malmi tn 12 korteriühistu claimed management-charge arrears and late-payment interest from owner XX. XX relied on the lack of a heater in part of the premises and defects in common property. The court examined payments, bills and meeting decisions on tariffs and found the claim proved. Heat from other rooms also reaches the room without a radiator, so it was not excluded from the calculation. Complaints about repairs did not remove the duty to pay management charges and comply with association decisions. Principal, accrued and continuing statutory late-payment interest until performance, and 445* euros in costs were awarded. The order does not establish the current balance or performance.

Outcome of this decision

Claim allowed; debt, late-payment interest and 445* euros in costs awarded.
Translation of an anonymised, abridged excerpt from Estonian
1. Allow the application of Narva linn, Malmi tn 12 korteriühistu against XX for management-charge arrears.
First instance
Case 2-22-139489Source: Riigi Teataja ↗

Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 10b korteriühistu · 80145534

Apartment association bills, payments and debtsDebt claimsBills and justification of chargesLate-payment interest and consequences of delayHeatingCalculation and allocation of heating chargesWater and sewerageCalculation of water chargesRepairs and shared propertyFaçade, windows and balconiesOrganisation and funding of repairs

How it started · editorial summary

The court required evidence of tariffs and services despite the absence of a response.

· Court orderViru Maakohus · First instance · № 2-22-139489/31Read actFirst instance

Separate act page

Checking the basis of management charges

Court order · Viru Maakohus · First instance

Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 10b korteriühistu · 80145534

Entry into force has not been reverified

Participants and roles: applicant — Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 10b korteriühistu; person concerned XX — debtor

How it started · editorial summary

The court required evidence of tariffs and services despite the absence of a response.

The dispute and the court’s decision

Narva linn, Kangelaste prospekt 10b korteriühistu claimed management-charge arrears and accrued late-payment interest from XX. After unsuccessful service of a payment proposal, the case was transferred to the county court. The court deemed documents served through the letterbox once procedural conditions were satisfied; XX did not respond. The court requested further evidence of the basis of the charges. The charter, meeting decisions on tariffs and a facade fund, supplier contracts and heating and water-circulation calculations proved the obligation and debt. The application was allowed. Principal, accrued late-payment interest, 470 euros in costs and statutory late-payment interest on costs from entry into force of the decision fixing them were awarded. Continuing late-payment interest on principal was not awarded in the operative part. Subsequent performance is not established.

Outcome of this decision

Application allowed; debt, accrued late-payment interest and 470 euros in costs with statutory late-payment interest on costs awarded.

A checked extract in this language is not yet available.

First instance