RESOLUTION OF THE SUPREME ECONOMIC COURT OF THE REPUBLIC OF UZBEKISTAN

of October 20, 2004 No. 10-0418/3886

(extraction)

Incomplete clarification of the circumstances important for case is the basis to cancellation of judgments.

The Birlik-Service condominium appealed to economic court with the claim to studio of cable television Ustoz for collection of 3676468-80 bags constituting the amount of damage, the property which arose in case of recovery.

By the judgment satisfaction of claims it is refused.

The decision is left by the resolution of appellate instance without change.

Without having agreed with the court resolutions which took place on case, the claimant addressed with the writ of appeal about their cancellation, with satisfaction in full claims.

Judicial board, having listened to explanations of agents of the parties, opinion of the prosecutor believing to satisfy the writ of appeal partially and to send case for new trial, having studied case papers, having discussed arguments of the writ of appeal, considers the court resolutions which took place on case subject to cancellation with case referral on new trial on the first instance in the same court on the following bases.

As the Birlik-Service Condominium is seen from case papers, including that because of workers of cable television roofs of the multi-storey houses located in the area are damaged "Yangi Hayet" waved, made the claim to studio of cable television Ustoz.

Courts of the previous instances case papers study superficially and take insufficient measures for establishment of the objective facts of the case.

As it became clear in case of trial of case in court of cassation instance, the studio of cable television Ustoz is not legal entity, and the business owner Dzhalilov T. participating in case as the defendant's representative, is procedurally not recruited by Trial Court in case.

Besides, from oral evidences of Dzhalilov T. it is seen that it consists in contractual relations with Ozbekiston Kabel Televidenyasi Ltd and is engaged in rendering services to the population in servicing of cable antennas.

Therefore, without recruiting in the case of the business owner Dzhalilov T. and Ozbekiston Kabel Televidenyasi Ltd, the Trial Court could not give objective and correct assessment to the claimant's arguments.

Thus, the writ of appeal is subject to partial satisfaction as the previous instances in case of pronouncement of decisions assume violations of regulations of procedural law that is the basis for their cancellation, with the direction of case on new trial.

In case of new trial of case, the Trial Court needs to eliminate all above omissions and on set collected to make in the matter of proofs on dispute legal and reasoned decision.

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