NAME OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE KYRGYZ REPUBLIC

SOLUTION OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF THE KYRGYZ REPUBLIC

of June 16, 1998

According to the petition of Meerim trading house for recognition of Article unconstitutional and inappropriate to Item 2 7, to Article 15, to Item 3 of Article 84 and article 88 of the Constitution of the Kyrgyz Republic of the law-enforcement practice established by the decision of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Kyrgyz Republic of March 4, 1997 and the resolution of cassation instance of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Kyrgyz Republic of May 27, 1997 on case on the claim of investment bank, "Ysyk-Kol" to Meerim trading house about collection of credit debt in the amount 7, of 06631 som

Constitutional court of the Kyrgyz Republic in structure: Chairman Bayekova Ch. T., vice-chairman Sutalinov A. A., P.N., Kenensariyev A. S. sudeydryzhaka., Osmonova K. E., Satybekova S. S., Togoybayev Zh. Zh., Esenaliyeva K. E. and Esenkanova K. E.,

Having heard the report of the judge Osmonov K. E., speeches of the director of Askarovoy S.A. Meerim trading house and her representative, lawyer Sydykov Ch. S., representative of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Kyrgyz Republic Tyurin V. I. and having researched case papers, the Constitutional court of the Kyrgyz Republic

ESTABLISHED:

In the Constitutional court of the Kyrgyz Republic the petition of Meerim trading house for recognition of Article unconstitutional and inappropriate to Item 2 7, to Article 15, to Item 3 of Article 84 and article 88 of the Constitution of the Kyrgyz Republic of the law-enforcement practice established by the decision of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Kyrgyz Republic of March 4, 1997 and the resolution of cassation instance of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Kyrgyz Republic of May 27, 1997 on case on the claim of Ysyk-Kol investment bank to Meerim trading house about collection of credit debt in the amount of 706631 som arrived on April 15, 1998.

The Meerim trading house brings the following arguments into reasons for the petition. The Supreme Arbitration Court of the Kyrgyz Republic with the decision of March 4, 1997, having satisfied the claim of Ysyk-Kol investment bank, collected from Meerim trading house credit debt in the amount of 706631 som, the national duty in the amount of 24132 som and postage expenses - 2 som of 50 tyyyn. The specified judgment is left by the resolution of cassation instance of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Kyrgyz Republic of May 27, 1997 without change. The Supreme Arbitration Court of the Kyrgyz Republic has no right to resolve economic disputes as Trial Court, especially to review own decisions. Consideration by the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Kyrgyz Republic of this case in quality of Trial Court and in cassation procedure contradicts Item 3 of article 84 of the Constitution of the Kyrgyz Republic according to which, the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Kyrgyz Republic is granted the implementation right only of supervision of judicial activities of Arbitration Courts of areas and the city of Bishkek.

In judicial session the director of Askarova S.A. Meerim trading house and her representative, the lawyer Sydykov Ch. S. having completely supported the petition ask it to satisfy. Representative of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Kyrgyz Republic Tyurin V. I. objects to the petition and asks it to leave without satisfaction.

Constitutional court of the Kyrgyz Republic, having discussed arguments of the parties and having researched case papers, considers the petition subject to satisfaction on the following bases.

Apparently from the provided materials, the decision of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Kyrgyz Republic of March 4, 1997 from Meerim trading house for benefit of Ysyk-Kol investment bank collects credit debt in the amount of 706631 som, including principal debt in the amount of 188900 som, interest on credit in the amount of 517731 som, the national duty in the amount of 24132 som and postage expenses 2 som of 50 tyyyn. Collection is turned on property of Meerim trading house before complete debt repayment in the amount of 730765 som of 50 tyyyn.

The writ of appeal for which consideration the Chairman of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Kyrgyz Republic created on May 14, 1997 judicial structure from Rybalkina A. D. judges is made on May 3, 1997 about this judgment by Meerim trading house., Akmatova B. D., and Maksimbekova D. I. The decision of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Kyrgyz Republic of March 4, 1997 is left by the resolution of cassation instance of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Kyrgyz Republic of May 27, 1997 without change, and the writ of appeal - without satisfaction.

Having considered legality of the decision of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Kyrgyz Republic of March 4, 1997, the resolution of cassation instance of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Kyrgyz Republic of May 27, 1997 violates Item 3 of article 84 of the Constitution of the Kyrgyz Republic which only granted to the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Kyrgyz Republic the right to exercise supervision and only of judicial activities of Arbitration Courts of areas and the city of Bishkek.

Besides, the specified decisions made by the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Kyrgyz Republic entailed violations of constitutional rights, both on legal protection of property, and on protection of person at any stage of process of consideration of legal case, guaranteed by Item 1 of Article 4 and Item 2 of article 88 of the Constitution of the Kyrgyz Republic.

Considering the specified circumstances, the Constitutional court of the Kyrgyz Republic considers that the law-enforcement practice established by the decision of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Kyrgyz Republic of March 4, 1997 and the resolution of cassation instance of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Kyrgyz Republic of May 27, 1997 on case on the claim of Ysyk-Kol investment bank to Meerim trading house about collection of credit debt in the amount of 706631 som is unconstitutional and does not correspond to Item 1 of Article 4, to item 4 of Article 79, to Item 3 of Article 84 and Item 2 of article 88 of the Constitution of the Kyrgyz Republic.

DECIDED:

Disclaimer! This text was translated by AI translator and is not a valid juridical document. No warranty. No claim. More info