Up
When a notary may lose the client’s money due to a bank going bankrupt
22.07.2015
Advocate, Head of the Bankruptcy Group of the Law Firm "YUST", Adviser to the Federal Chamber of Advocates of Russia Vasily Raudin discussed with the Pravo.ru portal the case, when the money of a client of a notary were kept in a bank that went bankrupt later. Vladislav Milevsky, a notary in the capital, has been in a feud with the Moscow Chamber of Notaries, which has been trying to strip him of his powers, with varied success. For the third year in a row, he has been arguing that VTB24 had had no right to write funds off his deposit account under a writ of execution. The Moscow City Court ruled the bank’s actions legal earlier, but Milevsky decided to try his luck once again and filed a new lawsuit against the bank claiming to have new arguments. The federal Chamber of Notaries alleges the Determination No. 5-В12-3 “Survey of the court practice for second quarter of 2012” dated May 15 of 2012 by the Supreme Court of Russia. The Court in that Determination stated that the funds are not to be exacted from the notary, provided the notary has taken every effort to duly perform the obligation as required by the respective level of due care and discretion (referring to clause 1 of Article 401 of the CCRF). Vasily Raudin said that “this position is certainly evaluative to an extent, but the Supreme Court has still given a general answer”.
Read more
Advocate, Head of the Bankruptcy Group of the Law Firm "YUST", Adviser to the Federal Chamber of Advocates of Russia Vasily Raudin discussed with the Pravo.ru portal the case, when the money of a client of a notary were kept in a bank that went bankrupt later. Vladislav Milevsky, a notary in the capital, has been in a feud with the Moscow Chamber of Notaries, which has been trying to strip him of his powers, with varied success. For the third year in a row, he has been arguing that VTB24 had had no right to write funds off his deposit account under a writ of execution. The Moscow City Court ruled the bank’s actions legal earlier, but Milevsky decided to try his luck once again and filed a new lawsuit against the bank claiming to have new arguments. The federal Chamber of Notaries alleges the Determination No. 5-В12-3 “Survey of the court practice for second quarter of 2012” dated May 15 of 2012 by the Supreme Court of Russia. The Court in that Determination stated that the funds are not to be exacted from the notary, provided the notary has taken every effort to duly perform the obligation as required by the respective level of due care and discretion (referring to clause 1 of Article 401 of the CCRF). Vasily Raudin said that “this position is certainly evaluative to an extent, but the Supreme Court has still given a general answer”.
Read more
Rankings and Partners
