Determine the jurisdiction of the following cases (2016

Exercise 1


Determine the jurisdiction of the following cases:
a) at the request of Ivanov to recognize the partnership "Love and Pigeons" insolvent;
b) at the request of a group of shareholders - individuals who appeal against the decision of the general meeting of the joint-stock company on the amount of dividends;
c) at the request of the tax authorities to OJSC Gladiator to collect a fine for incomplete payment of VAT;
d) at the request of the tax authorities to the individual entrepreneur to recover the tax arrears.

Activity 2


JSC "Seven", located in the Kemerovo region, applied at the location of the defendant to the arbitration court of the Tomsk region with a claim against LLC "Casino" on the collection of interest for the use of cash in the amount of 155 thousand rubles. As measures to secure the claim, the plaintiff asked the court to seize the defendant´s money on the settlement account. This petition of the plaintiff was satisfied by the court. When considering the case on the merits, the court refused to satisfy the claimant in full and quashed the measures to secure the claim. The defendant, after the court decision entered into legal force, decided to file a lawsuit against OAO "Seven" to recover damages caused to him by measures to secure the claim.
Determine the jurisdiction of the case.

Activity 3

In which cases the paid state fee is subject to return from the federal budget:
a) the statement of claim was left without consideration due to non-compliance by the plaintiff with the statutory dispute settlement procedure
b) the proceedings on the case are terminated due to the jurisdiction of the case to the court of general jurisdiction;
c) the plaintiff refused the claim in the session of the arbitration court of the first instance (Variant. ... in the session of the arbitration court of cassation);
d) the parties entered into an amicable agreement, the arbitration court dismissed the proceedings;
e) in the meeting of the arbitration court of the first instance, the parties reached an agreement on the transfer of the dispute to the resolution of the arbitral tribunal;
(e) Before the determination of the adoption of the statement of claim for the arbitral tribunal, the claimant was requested to return the application;
g) the decision of the arbitration court satisfied the claim for compensation for damage caused by illegal actions of the employees of the Institute of Taxation;
h) the statement of claim was paid by the state duty in a larger amount than provided for by the federal law;
i) before making a ruling on the adoption of an appeal against the appellate arbitration court, an application was submitted for its return;
j) cassation complaint was brought by a person who is not participating in the case;
l) the person who filed the cassation appeal, refused it in the session of the arbitration court of cassation.
Activity 4


The decision of the arbitration court on September 1 satisfied the statement of the organization of the debtor about challenging the actions of the Chkalovsky department of bailiffs of the city of Yekaterinburg to seize property by the bailiff-executor of this OSB Krylov, the actions of the PCB were found to be illegal. On October 1, the senior judicial officer of the Chkalovsky OSP Goncharenko filed an appeal against the decision of the court.
By the decision of the judge of the Arbitration Court of Appeal, the complaint was returned to Goncharenko with reference to Cl. 1 Part 1, Art. 264 of the AIC.
Are there grounds for the return of the appeal?
Option. At the time of filing an appeal, Krylov resigned from the bailiff service.

Statement of claim

OJSC "Martian" in 2015 acquired a part of the building from "Gravity" LLC. After the conclusion of the contract and the registration of the transaction, it was found out that 3 out of 6 purchased premises was occupied by the lessee, OOO Startrek, which refused to leave the premises occupied by it,