of July 11, 1996
About materials of generalization of court practice on disputes with participation of banks and on execution of decisions of economic courts by bank institutions
Presidium of the Supreme Economic Court of the Republic of Uzbekistan, having considered materials of generalization of court practice on disputes with participation of banks and execution of decisions of economic courts by bank institutions, prepared by judicial board according to the dispute resolution of the Supreme Economic Court,
1. The overview of practice of consideration of economic disputes with participation of banks and execution of decisions of economic courts by bank institutions to take into consideration.
2. Send the overview to economic court of the Republic of Karakalpakstan, economic courts of areas.
3. Judicial board according to the dispute resolution to prepare based on overview materials information on the violations allowed by bank institutions of the Republic of Uzbekistan, revealed during consideration of disputes with participation of banks.
For data and acceptance of necessary measures to send information to management of the Central bank and heads of republican commercial banks.
4. Introduce in the Ministry of Justice and the Central bank of the Republic of Uzbekistan the offer on holding joint zone seminars on the current legislation for employees of bank institutions.
Chairman of Presidium
Supreme Economic Court
Republic of Uzbekistan M. Abdusalamov
The judicial board according to the dispute resolution of the Supreme Economic Court generalizes practice of hearing of cases for 1995 and the first quarter 1996 by which one of the parties is the bank institution. For the specified period economic courts of the Republic of Uzbekistan considered 426 such cases.
Studying of legal cases showed that banks declared claims to the companies and the organizations, generally in connection with return of the amounts of the credits. In turn banks passed in quality of defendants because of improper execution of the contractual commitments. Besides, banks were made responsible for non-execution of judgments.
The analysis of the proceedings initiated in claims of banks confirms lack of necessary legal knowledge. In particular, heads of organizations of banks have no clear idea of form of business of bank and the effects following from this that served as cause of failure in the claim or suit abatements. So, significant amount of claims is shown by departments of banks which are not legal entities and with respect thereto can sign agreements or address with claims clients or in courts with claims only for and on behalf of higher bank.
The case N284 on the claim of the Tashkent regional department of Uzpromstroybank considered by economic court of the Tashkent region to NPO Avtozapchast about recognition by his bankrupt can be example. Proceeedings are stopped since, according to the power of attorney, the Tashkent regional department has the right to presentation of the claim and the claim only on behalf of Uzpromstroybank. Actually the claim was directed on its own behalf. In case of appeal to the court the claimant provided photocopy of the claim declared allegedly on behalf of Uzpromstroybank that did not prove to be true by consideration of dispute. On the similar bases productions on cases are stopped: N126 in Nodir's claim - Begimsky department PSB to Amir Temur insurance company about collection of the amount of outstanding loan and percent on the credit agreement in the amount of 1884,5 of one thousand sum; N2747 in the claim of Akmal-Ikramovsky department PSB for recognition by the bankrupt of Akmal-Ikramovsky ORPK.
Generalization of the considered cases showed that banks which have no legal service or it is insufficient qualified, cannot prepare correctly claim and claim materials, in particular, impose requirements about collection of the sanction with violation of the terms of limitation period established by Art. 85 of the Civil code of the Republic of Uzbekistan without declaring the petition for recovery of the passed term.
On such bases by economic court of the Samarkand region it is refused: in the claim of the Samarkand department of Uzpromstroybank to Mokhira private firm about collection of 592 thousand sum of penalty fee; in the claim of Railway department of Uzpromstroybank to private production commercial firm "Vito" about collection of penalty fee in the amount of 447 thousand sum.
Presentation of the claim without sufficient analysis of the available materials and regulating documents took place and in the matter of N 583, considered by economic court of the Tashkent region. Uzpromstroybank for the benefit of Nodira-Begimsky department of UZPSB addressed with the claim for recognition by the bankrupt of specialized self-supporting plodkombinat of N1 in communication by its debt in the amount of 13 million sum. In court it was determined that the credit is issued by bank in December, 1994 for purchase of potatoes in Poland and, according to specifying of the government of the republic, with calculation condition in nature from harvest of 1995. Terms of return of the credits issued in 1994 under purchases of potatoes were prolonged by the order of the Cabinet of Ministers from April 12, 1996 to January, 1997. The claim is declared by bank after the edition of this order. Naturally, requirements about recognition of plodokombinat by the bankrupt are rejected.
Results of generalization demonstrate that banks do not take exhaustive measures for return of the credits, allow their issue without analysis of economic condition of solvency of borrowers, not always correctly make agreements on bank servicing and issuance of credits, do not collect debt from insurance companies in case of approach of cases of risk of default of the credits. For example, the Andijan regional management of Uztadbirkorbank in September, 1995 appealed to economic court of the Andijan region with claims for recognition by bankrupts of different firms collection of amount of debt, received under the credits, and also about satisfaction of requirements on account of agreements of pledge.
From 11 cases only on five Tadbirkorbank accepted as guarantee agreements of pledge on the amount of 700 thousand sum everyone, and appear as subject of pledge 50 horse rake at the price of 14 thousand sum, i.e. on five cases - 250 rake in total estimated value of 3,5 of one million sum.
The bank issued loans without check of the fact of availability of rake, their technical condition. Though according to three credit agreements, concluded with private firms, the references (in them appear the same 50 sets) issued by the head of ATP-30 Uzvodstroytrans that rake is in ATP on otvetkhraneniya formed the basis. Besides, the credit was issued based on the agreement unregistered in accordance with the established procedure in the Ministry of Justice, under 100% of the amount of pledge.
It is characteristic that settlement accounts of the firms which obtained the credits were in the same bank. Under such circumstances did not constitute work to find out solvency of clients, their economic condition, possibility of real loan repayment. However it was not made.
Disclaimer! This text was translated by AI translator and is not a valid juridical document. No warranty. No claim. More info
Database include more 40000 documents. You can find needed documents using search system. For effective work you can mix any on documents parameters: country, documents type, date range, teams or tags.
More about search system
If you cannot find the required document, or you do not know where to begin, go to Help section.
In this section, we’ve tried to describe in detail the features and capabilities of the system, as well as the most effective techniques for working with the database.
You also may open the section Frequently asked questions. This section provides answers to questions set by users.