(812) 622-07-70
 

612, 7, Constitution Square
St. Petersburg, 196191

ru en

Projects

  • Rightmark Group lawyers prevented unreasonable prohibition on construction of the first skyscraper in St. Petersburg.

    Rightmark Group lawyers prevented unreasonable prohibition on construction of the first skyscraper in St. Petersburg.

    A business centre under construction in the Constitution Square will have 40 floors and be 140 meters high. Proceedings regarding the skyscraper construction between the developer and the owner of the adjacent building (LLC Petroestate) lasted 2.5 years. LLC Petroestate attempted to judicially prohibit the skyscraper construction and recover the amount of over RUB 1 million from the developer for damages allegedly caused to the adjacent building by ongoing construction works. With legal assistance of Rightmark Group the developer secured that the Arbitration Courts of St. Petersburg and Moscow dismissed the plaintiff's claims. LLC Petroestate understanding lack of prospects of its actions abandoned the principal action.

  • Rightmark Group managed to prevent closure of a popular Schastye restaurant in the historic centre of St. Petersburg.

    Rightmark Group managed to prevent closure of a popular Schastye restaurant in the historic centre of St. Petersburg.

    During a scheduled inspection in one of the most popular restaurants downtown, the Federal Service on Customers' Rights Protection and Human Well-being Surveillance (Rospotrebnadzor) revealed a number of violations of disease control and prevention regulations, and issued to the company an instruction to eliminate them. Then Rospotrebnadzor brought an action before the Arbitration Court to prohibit the company activities, making reference to the fact that the remaining violations are irremediable due to the special nature of the historic building in which Schastye restaurant is located. Defending the restaurant interests before the court, the lawyers draw special attention to the fact that Rospotrebnadzor, in violation of the Civil Code provisions, failed to provide evidence that the revealed defects may inflict harm in the future. Rightmark Group lawyers have convinced the court that the existing standards for restaurants are designed for the newly constructed projects and do not apply to a building constructed in the early 20th century, located in the historic city. As a result, courts of all instances dismissed Rospotrebnadzor action, and the restaurant will continue operating and delighting its customers.

  • Rightmark Group prevented an attempt of seizure of premises leased by the client in the centre of St. Petersburg.

    Rightmark Group prevented an attempt of seizure of premises leased by the client in the centre of St. Petersburg.

    LLC MAK rented non-residential premises from the city of St. Petersburg. A legal entity established in the privatization process in the early '90s, believing that it is the owner of the premises, filed a claim for reclamation of the leased property from unlawful possession of LLC MAK. Through the legal aid of Rightmark Group, LLC MAK managed to successfully defend its rights in court, and the claim of the legal entity was dismissed.

  • Rightmark Group lawyers secured cancellation of results of regional tender for transport services.

    Rightmark Group lawyers secured cancellation of results of regional tender for transport services.

    A third instance court invalidated results of a tender held with violations. The tender subject was a right to conclude a contract for public transport services on city and suburban routes public in Vsevolozhsky district of Leningrad Oblast. Due to tender procedure violations St. Petersburg transport company Victoria was unable to take part in the tender, and with the help of Rightmark Group lawyers brought an action before the court. In course of the legal proceedings local government changed in Vsevolozhsky district, and the new administration admitted the claim in full. Following the court judgment, the Traffic and Transport Infrastructure Committee of Leningrad Oblast will hold a new tender for the disputed routes. 

  • Rightmark Group protected investors of high end housing construction against improper expenses.

    Rightmark Group protected investors of high end housing construction against improper expenses.

    In course of refurbishment of a building in the city centre the developer enticed investors which were to obtain ownership of several high end apartments in this facility after the project completion. Rightmark Group represented interests of these investors. The developer missed the facility completion deadline, and thus had to pay to investors significant penalties under the relevant contracts. Investors set the penalties off against the last payments under investment contracts. As a result, the developer, in order to cause harm to the investors, registered a title to the disputed facilities in its favour. Investors filed a court action for cancellation of the developer’s title and declaration of their title to the apartments. Courts of three instances satisfied their claims, thus protecting the violated right of our client.
    Later on, the developer filed several claims for recovery of costs for maintenance of the disputed facilities (utilities, security, etc.). The asserted claims applied to exactly those periods during which the developer unlawfully owned the apartments and had to bear the relevant maintenance and operation costs. Courts of first instance satisfied the developer claims in three different cases in full. However, higher courts revoked three unlawful court decisions, stating that the developer had violated the contract terms. First judgments in all three cases were overturned, and unlawful claims of the developer were dismissed entirely.
     
  • Downtown building reconstruction investor could have left with nothing after the project completion due to developer fraud builder, if it was not for competent legal assistance of Rightmark Group.

    Downtown building reconstruction investor could have left with nothing after the project completion due to developer fraud builder, if it was not for competent legal assistance of Rightmark Group.

    In course of refurbishment of a building in the city centre the developer enticed an investor which was to obtain ownership of several high end apartments in this facility after the project completion. The developer missed the facility completion deadline, and thus had to pay to the investor a significant penalty under the relevant contract. The investor set the penalty off against the last payments under investment contracts. Dissatisfied with this, the developer registered a title to the whole facility in its favour. The investor resorted to Rightmark Group lawyers on time, and filed a court action for cancellation of the developer’s title and declaration of their title to the apartments. Courts of three instances satisfied the claims, thus protecting the violated right of the investor.

  • Rightmark Group helped the developer to defend a land plot intended for integrated housing development.

    Rightmark Group helped the developer to defend a land plot intended for integrated housing development.

    A construction company planned to conclude an investment contract for residential land development in accordance with the urban development plan under the appropriate procedure. Prior to bidding for the right to lease land, a legal entity laid claims to the territory attempting to judicially prove its title to waterworks located in the land plot. Under the law, proof of the title would automatically give the owner of the waterworks the right to purchase this land. The construction company resorted to Rightmark Group lawyers. As a result, absence of grounds for registration of a title to the hydraulic structures was established to satisfaction of court, since the title thereto had passed to the company by universal succession, prior to entry into force of the law on state registration of title to real property and transactions therewith, and the existing documentation did not allow to match the facility, the title to which was claimed by the plaintiff, to the facilities specified in the documents of title. Thus, an investment contract was concluded with regard to this land plot according to the established procedure was signed an investment agreement, and the housing construction is in progress thereon.

  • Protection of interests of land plot owners in Leningrad Oblast from land seizure.

    Protection of interests of land plot owners in Leningrad Oblast from land seizure.

    Rightmark Group lawyers suppressed activities of bad faith investors which attempted to seize land plots in Priozersky district of Leningrad Oblast owned by citizens on the basis of shared ownership. A legal due diligence was conducted, and lawyers together with investigators found out and established to satisfaction of court that investors used forged documents. The court declared the actions of the investors illegal.

  • Former member of LLC Industria-Plus managed to regain corporate control of the development company through the legal assistance of Rightmark Group.

    Former member of LLC Industria-Plus managed to regain corporate control of the development company through the legal assistance of Rightmark Group.

    LLC Industria-Plus is a St. Petersburg multifamily housing developer. Rightmark Group lawyers protected interests of a natural person, a former member of LLC Industria-Plus in a case on recovery of 100% of the company ownership due to failure of the purchaser to perform obligations under the share purchase agreement. Thanks to efforts of our lawyers, corporate control of the development company was regained by the previous owner.

  • An attempt of seizure of an apartment building constructed by the investor was reversed.

    An attempt of seizure of an apartment building constructed by the investor was reversed.

    A land plot owner filed a claim for termination of a general investment contract in order to seize an apartment building constructed by an investor company. The first instance court satisfied this claim. Rightmark Group lawyers convinced higher courts in absence of grounds for termination of the general investment contract and protected investments of our client and its co-investors.