Arbitral Digest

Matter

Osaühing ProInkasso v OÜ PROKTER (Tallinn Court of Appeal, case 2-20-3168/118, 27 May 2022)

  1. 11 May 2020Estonia

    11 May 2020Estonia

    Order of the Harju County Court dated 11 May 2020

    Harju County Court

    Decision summary
    The court imposed interim measures including judicial mortgages in the proceedings.

    8 months and 7 days later · 252 days

  2. 18 January 2021Estonia

    18 January 2021Estonia

    Order of the Harju County Court dated 18 January 2021

    Harju County Court

    Decision summary
    The court partly granted OÜ PROKTER's application for security for its expected procedural costs.

    10 months and 12 days later · 316 days

  3. 30 November 2021Estonia

    30 November 2021Estonia

    Decision of the Harju County Court dated 30 November 2021

    Harju County Court

    Decision summary
    The court dismissed Osaühing ProInkasso's claim against OÜ PROKTER, allocated the proceedings costs to ProInkasso, determined PROKTER's recoverable costs at EUR 11,954.44, and cancelled the interim measures.

    Supporting details

    2 participants
    Osaühing ProInkasso
    OÜ PROKTER
    Harju County Court

    5 months and 17 days later · 168 days

  4. 17 May 2022Estonia

    17 May 2022Estonia

    Order of the Tallinn Court of Appeal dated 17 May 2022

    Tallinn Court of Appeal

    Decision summary
    The court replaced one judicial mortgage securing the proceedings with EUR 60,400 paid into the court account as security.

    10 days later · 10 days

  5. 27 May 2022Estonia

    27 May 2022Estonia

    Decision of the Tallinn Court of Appeal in case 2-20-3168/118 dated 27 May 2022

    Tallinn Court of Appeal

    Decision summary
    The court dismissed Osaühing ProInkasso's appeal and left the dismissal of its EUR 425,000 unjust-enrichment claim against OÜ PROKTER in force, while supplementing the first-instance reasoning. It allocated the trial and appellate costs to ProInkasso, awarded PROKTER EUR 1,704 in appellate costs, and directed that EUR 6,240 of the first-instance costs be paid from security already deposited.

    Supporting details

    9 authorities · 8 participants
    Osaühing ProInkasso
    Representative
    Rene Varul (For: Osaühing ProInkasso)
    OÜ PROKTER
    Representative
    Annika Vait (For: OÜ PROKTER)
    Representative
    Siret Siilbek (For: OÜ PROKTER)
    Tallinn Court of Appeal

    Authorities cited

    9
    • Estonian Code of Civil Procedure (TsMS) (Tsiviilkohtumenetluse seadustik)
      statute
    • Estonian Law of Obligations Act (Võlaõigusseadus)
      statute
    • Regulation (EC) No 864/2007 (Rome II Regulation) (Regulation (EC) No 864/2007)
      regulation
    • Regulation (EC) No 593/2008 (Rome I Regulation) (Regulation (EC) No 593/2008)
      regulation
    • Latvian Civil Law (Civillikums) (Civillikums)
      statute
    • Latvian Commercial Law (Komerclikums) (Komerclikums)
      statute
    • Latvian Civil Procedure Law (Civilprocesa likums) (Civilprocesa likums)
      statute
    • Supreme Court of Estonia order of 23 March 2016 in civil case 3-2-1-184-15 (Civil case 3-2-1-184-15)
      case
    • Supreme Court of Estonia judgment of 2 February 2022 in civil case 2-20-6269 (Civil case 2-20-6269)
      case
  6. Date not availableArbitration

    Date not availableArbitration

    Award of the Riga International Arbitration Court in case 73/18 dated 1 November 2018

    Decision summary
    The tribunal declared the mortgage agreement between SIA Meža Properties and OÜ PROKTER invalid and ordered OÜ PROKTER to remove the mortgages.

    Supporting details

    2 participants
    SIA Meža Properties
    OÜ PROKTER

Matter record

Report a correction

Osaühing ProInkasso v OÜ PROKTER (Tallinn Court of Appeal, case 2-20-3168/118, 27 May 2022) · Matter