A civil case under a construction contract for the recovery of arrears of penalties and damages.
On June 12, 2025, case No. 6309-24-00-2/3702, the Specialized Interdistrict Economic Court of the East Kazakhstan region, consisting of the presiding judge Alyokhina N.P., considered the civil case in open court.: Limited Liability Company "C kz" to Limited Liability Company "I P " on the recovery of the amount owed , on the recovery of penalties , on the recovery of losses.
Thus, on August 28, 2023, the limited liability partnership "C kz" (hereinafter referred to as the contractor) and the limited liability partnership "I P" (hereinafter referred to as the subcontractor) concluded a contract No. DV-08/28/23 for the performance of work on the Brick Town residential complex under construction, blocks 5,6,7 in the amount of 5,846 350 tenge (hereinafter referred to as Agreement No. 1). By payment order No. 124 dated August 29, 2023, the contractor paid an advance of 500,000 tenge to the subcontractor.
The Act of completed works No. 2 dated September 25, 2023, signed by the parties, confirmed the completion of electrical installation works in the amount of 339 318.7 tenge.
By the agreement on termination of the contract dated October 10, 2023, the parties decided to terminate the contract from October 9, 2023, subject to the completion of work by the subcontractor by December 31, 2023 in the amount of 41,792.52 tenge and the return of the prepayment of 118,888.77 tenge, no later than December 30, 2023. The Malfunction Act dated November 12, 2024 identified deficiencies in the performance of work under contract No. 1.
According to the defective act without a number drawn up by VK INVEST COMPANY LLP for Brick Town position No. block 5, it was decided to deduct from Certa kz LLP the cost of works 116,600 tenge, the cost of materials 642,000 tenge.
The parties also signed a contract No. 28/10/23 dated August 28, 2023 for the performance of electrical installation work at the Multi-storey Residential Building facility.
Position 87" (hereinafter referred to as contract 2) in the amount of 1,444,480 tenge. The Act of Completed works No. 3 dated September 30, 2023, signed by the parties, confirmed the completion of works in the amount of 1,419,780 tenge.
According to the invoice for the release of stocks to the side dated September 12, 2023, equipment and materials in the amount of 1,541,665 tenge were transferred to the subcontractor.
By the act of inspection of the facility dated November 25, 2024, the contractor partially revealed the absence of transferred materials and equipment.
On September 22, 2023, the parties signed an agreement No. P-51 for the installation of a fire alarm system and commissioning at the Complex of 12- and 16-storey residential buildings under construction along K. Avenue.Satpayeva in the city of Ust Kamenogorsk.
Position 51" (hereinafter referred to as Contract 3) for the amount of KZT 1,089,180, with a deadline of October 13, 2023. By payment order No. 161 dated September 22, 2023, the contractor paid an advance of 115,200 tenge to the subcontractor.
The Act of Completed Works No. 4 dated October 12, 2023, signed by the parties, confirmed the completion of works in the amount of 1,089,450 tenge.
By the act of inspection of the facility dated November 20, 2024, the contractor partially revealed the absence of transferred materials and equipment. On November 28, 2024, the plaintiff filed a pre-trial claim under contract No. 1 for voluntary payment of damages.
Earlier, the defendant filed a lawsuit to recover from the plaintiff the amounts according to the acts of work performed under contracts No. 2 and No. 3. By the decision of the specialized interdistrict Economic Court of the East Kazakhstan region dated January 23, 2025, the claim of the limited liability company "I P " to the limited liability company "C kz" for debt collection and penalties should be satisfied.
Debt in the amount of 2,394,030 (two million three hundred and ninety-four thousand thirty) tenge, a penalty in the amount of 96,148 (ninety-six thousand one hundred and forty-eight) tenge, as well as court costs for the payment of the state fee were recovered from the limited liability company "C kz" in favor of the limited liability company "I P". in the amount of 74,706 (seventy-four thousand seven hundred and six) tenge, payment for the activities of a private bailiff in the amount of 39,320 (thirty-nine thousand three hundred and twenty) tenge.
The plaintiff filed a lawsuit to recover the amount of material damage caused under three contracts in the amount of 8,250,385 tenge. The claim is motivated by the fact that under contract No. 1, the defendant actually, according to the act of completed works No. 2 signed by the parties for September 2023, completed works only in the amount of 339 318.70 tenge.
The advance was paid in the amount of 500,000 tenge, the defects were not eliminated. The termination agreement No. 1 has not fulfilled the conditions of termination on the part of the defendant.
Under contract No. 2, the act was signed in the amount of 1,419,780 tenge, however, there are outstanding works, missing equipment, materials transferred by way of invoice, defects have not been eliminated. Under contract No. 3, the act of completed works was signed in the amount of 1,089,450 tenge, however, there are outstanding works, there is no equipment, materials transferred to the defendant.
Subsequently, the plaintiff clarified the claims, asked to recover under contract No. 1 the overpaid amount of 160,681 tenge, a fine of 584,635 tenge; losses incurred under the defective act in the amount of 758,600 tenge; for non-fulfillment of obligations to eliminate defects in the amount of 1,500,000 tenge; under contract No. 2 the amount for missing equipment, materials, unfinished work 1,793,207.68 tenge; for non-fulfillment of obligations to eliminate defects, the amount of 1,500,000 tenge; under contract No. 3, the amount for missing equipment, materials, and unfinished work 1,953,262 tenge.
A response was received from the defendant, in which he did not agree with the claim, stating that on August 28, 2023, a subcontract agreement No.DP-28/08/23 was concluded between the parties, which was terminated by the termination agreement dated October 10, 2023. Subsequently, the defendant's specialists conducted an inspection of the APS as part of the warranty service of this facility.
During the survey, it was found that a part of the equipment needed to be replaced and the system reconfigured. As a result, the defendant contacted the chairman of the AXIS of the Ministry of Railways Kasimov M.B., agreed on the procedure and mechanism of elimination, which was also subsequently eliminated.
This fact is confirmed by an official document signed by the parties. At the same time, the debt owed to Certa kz LLP in the amount of 160,681.29 tenge is not disputed. According to the plaintiff's claims arising from work contracts No. 28/10/23 dated August 28, 2023 and No. P51 dated September 22, 2023, it does not recognize in full and considers the plaintiff's claims in this part not to be fully satisfied.
In court, the plaintiff's representatives supported the clarified claim on the grounds set out in the lawsuit, and asked for the claim to be satisfied. The defendant's representatives supported the arguments indicated in the response and asked to dismiss the claim, adding that contract No. 1, despite the signed agreement, was not terminated, as the plaintiff had not fulfilled the terms of the termination agreement.
According to requirements No. 1,2,3, by virtue of Article 272 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan (hereinafter referred to as the Civil Code), the obligation must be fulfilled properly in accordance with the terms of the obligation and the requirements of the legislation.
At the same time, according to Article 273 of the Civil Code, unilateral refusal to fulfill an obligation and unilateral modification of its terms are not allowed, except in cases stipulated by law or contract.
In accordance with Article 616 of the Civil Code, under a work contract, one party (contractor) undertakes to perform certain work on behalf of the other party (customer) and deliver its result to the customer within the prescribed period, and the customer undertakes to accept the result of the work and pay for it (pay the price of the work). The procedure for acceptance of work is regulated by the norms of Article 663 of the Civil Code, which stipulates that the delivery of work results by the contractor and their acceptance by the customer are formalized by an act signed by both parties.
In accordance with paragraph 1 of Article 651 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, under a construction contract, the contractor undertakes to build a specific facility or perform other construction work on behalf of the customer within the time period specified by the contract, and the customer undertakes to create the necessary conditions for the contractor to perform the work, accept its result and pay the stipulated price for it.
The court found that under the terms of the contracts, the defendant must perform work under contract No. 1 in the amount of 5,846,350 tenge by December 31, 2023, under contract No. 2 in the amount of 1,444,480 tenge by December 31, 2023, under contract No. 3 in the amount of 1,089,480 tenge by October 13, 2023.
By means of payment orders, the plaintiff transferred to the defendant an advance payment under contract No. 1 dated August 29, 2023 in the amount of 500,000 tenge, under contract No. 3 dated September 22, 2023 in the amount of 115,000 tenge. The acts of completed works were signed by the parties under contract No. 1 in the amount of 339 318.7 tenge, under contract No. 2 in the amount of 1,419,780 tenge, under contract No. 3 in the amount of 1,089,480 tenge.
In order to determine the volume and cost of the work performed, the court appointed a judicial construction and economic expertise. Expert opinion No. 59 dated June 9, 2025 of the East Kazakhstan Independent Forensic Examination Institution established that it is not possible to determine the compliance of the quality of work performed under the contract on 08/28/23 dated August 28, 2023 in terms of work performed in the amount of 339,318 tenge and the act of work performed in the amount of 339,318 tenge with the terms of the contract and applicable regulations This is possible, since the contract on 08/28/23 dated August 28, 2023 in the amount of 5,846,350 tenge, the act of completed works in the amount of 339,318 tenge and the object for research has not been submitted to the expert.
The cost of work performed under contract No. 28/10/23 dated August 28, 2023 for the installation of fire alarms and video surveillance is 357,060 tenge, installation of an intercom system in the amount of 271,920 tenge according to the act of work performed No. 3 dated September 30, 2023 accepted by the plaintiff LLP "Certa kz", installation of a communication system in the amount of 44,700 tenge the inspection is not submitted by the parties.
During the survey, it was found that a part of the equipment needed to be replaced and the system reconfigured. As a result, the defendant contacted the chairman of the AXIS of the Ministry of Railways Kasimov M.B., agreed on the procedure and mechanism of elimination, which was also subsequently eliminated.
This fact is confirmed by an official document signed by the parties. At the same time, the debt owed to Certa kz LLP in the amount of 160,681.29 tenge is not disputed. According to the plaintiff's claims arising from work contracts No. 28/10/23 dated August 28, 2023 and No. P51 dated September 22, 2023, it does not recognize in full and considers the plaintiff's claims in this part not to be fully satisfied.
In court, the plaintiff's representatives supported the clarified claim on the grounds set out in the lawsuit, and asked for the claim to be satisfied. The defendant's representatives supported the arguments indicated in the response and asked to dismiss the claim, adding that contract No. 1, despite the signed agreement, was not terminated, as the plaintiff had not fulfilled the terms of the termination agreement.
According to requirements No. 1,2,3, by virtue of Article 272 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan (hereinafter referred to as the Civil Code), the obligation must be fulfilled properly in accordance with the terms of the obligation and the requirements of the legislation.
At the same time, according to Article 273 of the Civil Code, unilateral refusal to fulfill an obligation and unilateral modification of its terms are not allowed, except in cases stipulated by law or contract.
In accordance with Article 616 of the Civil Code, under a work contract, one party (contractor) undertakes to perform certain work on behalf of the other party (customer) and deliver its result to the customer within the prescribed period, and the customer undertakes to accept the result of the work and pay for it (pay the price of the work). The procedure for acceptance of work is regulated by the norms of Article 663 of the Civil Code, which stipulates that the delivery of work results by the contractor and their acceptance by the customer are formalized by an act signed by both parties.
In accordance with paragraph 1 of Article 651 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, under a construction contract, the contractor undertakes to build a specific facility or perform other construction work on behalf of the customer within the time period specified by the contract, and the customer undertakes to create the necessary conditions for the contractor to perform the work, accept its result and pay the stipulated price for it.
The court found that under the terms of the contracts, the defendant must perform work under contract No. 1 in the amount of 5,846,350 tenge by December 31, 2023, under contract No. 2 in the amount of 1,444,480 tenge by December 31, 2023, under contract No. 3 in the amount of 1,089,480 tenge by October 13, 2023.
By means of payment orders, the plaintiff transferred to the defendant an advance payment under contract No. 1 dated August 29, 2023 in the amount of 500,000 tenge, under contract No. 3 dated September 22, 2023 in the amount of 115,000 tenge. The acts of completed works were signed by the parties under contract No. 1 in the amount of 339 318.7 tenge, under contract No. 2 in the amount of 1,419,780 tenge, under contract No. 3 in the amount of 1,089,480 tenge.
In order to determine the volume and cost of the work performed, the court appointed a judicial construction and economic expertise. Expert opinion No. 59 dated June 9, 2025 of the East Kazakhstan Independent Forensic Examination Institution established that it is not possible to determine the compliance of the quality of work performed under the contract on 08/28/23 dated August 28, 2023 in terms of work performed in the amount of 339,318 tenge and the act of work performed in the amount of 339,318 tenge with the terms of the contract and applicable regulations This is possible, since the contract on 08/28/23 dated August 28, 2023 in the amount of 5,846,350 tenge, the act of completed works in the amount of 339,318 tenge and the object for research has not been submitted to the expert.
The cost of work performed under contract No. 28/10/23 dated August 28, 2023 for the installation of fire alarms and video surveillance is 357,060 tenge, installation of an intercom system in the amount of 271,920 tenge according to the act of work performed No. 3 dated September 30, 2023 accepted by the plaintiff LLP "Certa kz", installation of a communication system in the amount of 44,700 tenge the inspection is not submitted by the parties.
It is not possible to determine the compliance of construction and installation works according to the acts of completed works No. 3 dated September 30, 2023, performed under contract No. 28/10/23 dated August 28, 2023 with the requirements of the contract and applicable regulations.
The parties did not submit the form of the act of completed works 2B (construction AVR) indicating the list of types of work and equipment. The plaintiff provided the act of completed works (services rendered) No. 3 dated September 30, 2023, Form R-1 (Appendix 50 to the Order of the Minister of Finance of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated December 20, 2012 No. 562) in the amount of 1,419,780 tenge.
This act is a financial document for accounting departments without decoding the types and volumes of work and materials. For 10 items of equipment installation, materials under the contract No. 28/10/23 dated August 28, 2023 do not correspond to the invoice for the release of supplies to the party for No.UKa-001 dated September 12, 2023.
It is not possible to determine the scope and cost of the work performed under contract No.51 dated September 22, 2023.
The parties did not provide an annex to the contract with a list of types of work and equipment.
An expert with the participation of the parties conducted a visual inspection of the research object from the 1st to the 16th floors. During the inspection, non–working smoke detectors were installed on the 16th floor - 2 pcs, on the 9th floor the IPR detector - 1 pc. It is not possible to determine the compliance of construction and installation works according to the acts of completed works No. 4 dated September 30, 2023, performed under the contract No.51 dated September 22, 2023 with the requirements of the contract and applicable regulations. The parties did not provide an annex to the contract with a list of types of work and equipment.
The Act of completed works No. 4 dated September 30, 2023 has not been submitted for research. The plaintiff provided the act of completed works (services rendered) No. 4 dated October 12, 2023, Form R-1 (Appendix 50 to the Order of the Minister of Finance of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated December 20, 2012 No. 562) in the amount of KZT 1,089,450. This act is a financial document for accounting departments without decoding the types and volumes of work and materials.
It is not possible to determine the compliance of the availability and installation of equipment and materials under contract No. 51 dated September 22, 2023, transferred by the customer. The parties did not provide documents for the study confirming the transfer of materials and equipment, indicating the list and quantity.
The parties did not provide the following documents in response to the expert's request:
- certificates of completed works (in the prescribed form);
- annex to Contract No. 51 dated September 22, 2023 with a list of types and volumes of work;
- general work log and special work logs, input and operational quality control logs;
- executive technical documentation (executive scheme, certificates of inspection of hidden works, test reports, work logs, certificates and passports for the materials and products used, and other documents reflecting the actual performance and quality of work);
- documents confirming the labeling of materials, products, structures (trademark of the company, brand of the product, date of manufacture, stamp);- a list of types and volumes of additional work not provided for by the contract (estimates, technical specifications, drawings);
- working documentation (a set of project documentation, which generally includes a specification, an assembly drawing, - drawings of parts and, if necessary, technical specifications;
- technological documentation (documentation related to technological processes and operations in the manufacture of products (technological regulations or technological map). Under contract No. 1, considering that the plaintiff transferred an advance in the amount of 500,000 tenge, the act of completed works confirmed the completion of works in the amount of 339 318.7 tenge, the difference is 160 681 tenge.
In this regard, the court considers the plaintiff's claim to recover the amount of 160,681 tenge to be justified and recoverable. In accordance with Article 293 of the Civil Code, a penalty (fine, fine) is a monetary amount determined by law or contract, which the debtor is obliged to pay to the creditor in case of non-fulfillment or improper fulfillment of obligations.
According to clause 5.2 of Contract No. 1, work under the contract must be started and completed in strict accordance with the deadlines set in the schedule of work.
According to clause 7.5 of Contract No. 1, for non-fulfillment or improper fulfillment of obligations not provided for in clause 7.4, but provided for in the terms of this agreement, including clauses 4.2., 5.2, 5.7, a fine in the amount of 1,000 tenge to 10% of the total amount of the annex to this agreement is imposed on the subcontractor, at the discretion of the contractor, and The subcontractor also fully reimburses all losses actually incurred by the contractor as a result of non-compliance with its obligations.
By the agreement on termination of the contract dated October 10, 2023, the parties decided to terminate the contract from October 9, 2023, subject to the completion of work by the subcontractor by December 31, 2023 in the amount of 41,792.52 tenge and the return of the prepayment of 118,888.77 tenge, no later than December 30, 2023. According to paragraph 1.5 of the above agreement, the contract is considered terminated only after the return of the remaining prepayment of 118,888.77 tenge and the signing of certificates of completed works in the amount of 41,792.52 tenge.
Considering that the plaintiff has not fulfilled the terms of the termination agreement, the court concludes that contract No. 1 between the parties has not been terminated. The contract amount is 5,846,350 tenge, 10% of the contract amount is 584,635 tenge, which is recoverable from the defendant in favor of the plaintiff.
The court considers the plaintiff's claims for recovery under contract No. 1 of losses in the amount of 758,600 tenge and the amount for non-fulfillment of obligations to eliminate defects in the amount of 1,500,000 tenge to be unfounded and unsatisfactory on the following grounds.
In accordance with paragraph 4 of Article 9 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan (hereinafter referred to as the Civil Code), a person whose right has been violated may demand full compensation for damages caused to him, unless otherwise provided by legislative acts or a contract.
Losses mean expenses that are incurred or should be incurred by a person whose right has been violated, loss or damage to his property (real damage), as well as lost income that this person would have received under normal conditions of turnover if his right had not been violated (lost profits).
It follows from the above-mentioned legislative norm that in order to recover damages, it is necessary to establish such mandatory circumstances as the occurrence of the event that caused the harm, the illegality (illegality) of the harm-doer's behavior, the guilt of the person who is charged with causing harm and the causal relationship between these circumstances.
So, according to the defective act of the act without a number drawn up by VK INVEST COMPANY LLP for Brick Town position No. block 5, it was decided to deduct from C kz LLP the cost of works 116,600 tenge, the cost of materials 642,000 tenge.
At the same time, the defective act does not specify the date of its compilation, the act was drawn up without the participation of representatives of the defendant. In addition, the defective certificate reflects the absence of a cable up to 10 mm., The works are reflected in the amount of 530 m. in the amount of 166,500 tenge, materials in the amount of 1,700 m and 100 m. in the amount of 642,000 tenge.
Together, the act of completed works in the amount of 339 318.7 tenge reflects the completion of cable installation work up to 6 mm. Moreover, according to the terms of contract No. 1, the materials supplied by the General Contractor are used in the course of the work (clause 6.1). The expert's conclusion does not establish under contract No. 1 that the quality of the work performed meets the terms of the contract and the amount of the discrepancy, due to the failure to provide the expert with an object for research, an agreement with appendices, and an act of completed work.
In accordance with paragraph 5 of Article 82 of the CPC, if a party evades participation in the examination or obstructs its conduct (does not attend the examination, does not provide experts with the materials necessary for the study, does not provide an opportunity to study objects belonging to it that are impossible or difficult to submit to the court), and in the circumstances of the case without participation It is impossible to conduct an expert examination of this party, the court, depending on which side evades the expert examination, has the right to recognize the fact for which the expert examination was appointed., established or refuted.
Failure by the plaintiff to provide the expert with the object of research, documents, is regarded by the court as a procedural omission by the plaintiff. The plaintiff's arguments about the existence of an act of malfunction received from the chairman of the AXIS of the MZhD – To M.B. according to the APS system at the Facility and the existing problems, they are refuted by the provided act on troubleshooting the APS at the facility at 68 Esenberlin Street, dated December 12, 2024, signed by the chairman of the MZHD AXIS himself, M.B. Kasimov, whose statement was referred to by the plaintiff, who confirmed that all work was completed in full and meets the requirements established by According to the contract and technical regulations, there are no complaints about the quality of the work performed.
Under contract No. 2, the act of completed works was signed in the amount of 1,419,780 tenge (excluding the installation of a communication system in the amount of 44,700 tenge). The expert's conclusion established the completion of work on the installation of an automatic fire communication system in the amount of 280,860 tenge; video surveillance in the amount of 76,200 tenge, installation of an intercom system the object was not submitted for inspection (amount 271,900 tenge). At the same time, in court, the parties confirmed the completion of work on the installation of the dophomonia system in the amount of 271,900 tenge.
The court also found that the missing position 3 in Table No. 3 of the expert's conclusion is Grand Magist 4, a modular plastic housing receiving and control device - in fact, 9 Grand Masters were installed for a total amount of 54,000 tenge.
Also, according to the missing item 10 of the same table, IP 212-142 Smoke detector (not submitted for research), the court found that 149 detectors are located in the tenants' apartments and their presence was not established during the inspection.
The cost of 149 detectors is 178,800 tenge. That is, the expert's conclusion and the identified additional circumstances in court established the performance of work under contract No. 2: 280 860 tenge (installation of an automatic fire alarm system) + 76 200 tenge (video surveillance) + 271 920 tenge (installation of an intercom system) + 54 000 tenge (performance of work on 9 pcs.Grand Master)+ 178,800 tenge (performance of work on 149 detectors)= 861,780 tenge. By the decision of the Council of Ministers of East Kazakhstan Region dated January 23, 2025, which entered into force, the amount of 1,419,780 tenge was recovered from the plaintiff in favor of the defendant under contract No. 2. 1,419,780 tenge (the amount recovered by court decision) – 861,780 tenge (the amount of actually completed work) = 558,000 tenge – the amount of outstanding work.
According to the invoice for the release of stocks to the side dated September 12, 2023, equipment and materials in the amount of 1,541,665 tenge were transferred to the subcontractor. The expert's conclusion partially established the equipment and materials for 10 positions.
At the same time, according to position 7 of Table 4 of the expert's conclusion, the presence of 149 detectors was not checked during the inspection due to the presence of detectors in the tenants' apartments. In this regard, the court considers that the absence of 149 detectors has not been confirmed.
For the remaining 9 items, the amount of missing equipment and materials, at the prices indicated in the absence of the invoice, was:
IP 212-141 V1. 04. Smoke detector, absence of 16 pieces in the amount of 32,960 tenge; Battery 12v 7ah, absence of 11 pieces in the amount of 49,500 tenge;
IPR 513-10. Manual fire detector, absence of 7 pieces in the amount of 11,760 tenge; Suite-12 "SHYGU/EXIT". The light board, the absence of 3 pieces in the amount of 4,500 tenge;
Universal box UK-2P, missing 19 pieces in the amount of 2,565 tenge; KPS Eng(A)-FRLS 1x2x0.5 fire-resistant cable, missing 50 m. in the amount of 6,250 tenge; KPS Eng(A)-FRLS 2x2x0.5 fire-resistant cable, no 400 m. in the amount of 92,000 tenge;
KPS Eng(A)-FRLS 2x2x0.75 fire-resistant cable., absence of 200 m in the amount of 61,000 tenge; VVg-Apg(A)- LS 3x1.5ok-0.66 electric power cable, absence of 160 m in the amount of 52,000 tenge. The absence of equipment and materials for a total amount of 312,535 tenge was established. The defendant's argument that not all equipment and materials were taken into account during the expert's inspection cannot be taken into account by the court, since the inspection was carried out in the presence of a representative of the defendant, LLP "I P" – D A.D. and he had the opportunity to draw the expert's attention to the work performed under the contract.
That is, under contract No. 2, the amount of outstanding work amounted to 558,000 tenge + the amount of missing equipment and materials 312,535 tenge = 870,535 tenge.
In this regard, the plaintiff's claim for recovery of the amount of outstanding work and the amount of missing equipment in the amount of 1,793,207.68 tenge is subject to partial recovery: in part 870,535 tenge.
The claim for recovery under contract No. 2 of the amount for non-fulfillment of obligations to eliminate defects in the amount of 1,500,000 tenge is not subject to satisfaction on the following grounds:
The plaintiff has not provided the court with evidence of defects under this agreement, their elimination, as well as evidence confirming the amount of defects eliminated in the amount of 1,500,000 tenge.
Under contract No. 3, the act of completed works No. 4 dated October 12, 2023 confirmed the completion of works in the amount of 1,089,450 tenge. According to the expert's conclusion, it is not possible to determine the volume and cost of the work performed under contract No.51 dated September 22, 2023.
The parties did not provide an annex to the contract with a list of types of work and equipment. An expert with the participation of the parties conducted a visual inspection of the research object from the 1st to the 16th floors.
During the inspection, non–working smoke detectors were installed on the 16th floor - 2 pieces, on the 9th floor the IPR detector - 1 piece. It is not possible to determine the compliance of construction and installation works according to the acts of completed works No. 4 dated September 30, 2023, performed under the contract No.51 dated September 22, 2023 with the requirements of the contract and applicable regulations. The parties did not provide an annex to the contract with a list of types of work and equipment.
The Act of completed works No. 4 dated September 30, 2023 has not been submitted for research. The plaintiff provided the act of completed works (services rendered) No. 4 dated October 12, 2023, Form R-1 (Appendix 50 to the Order of the Minister of Finance of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated December 20, 2012 No. 562) in the amount of KZT 1,089,450.
This act is a financial document for accounting departments without decoding the types and volumes of work and materials. It is not possible to determine the compliance of the availability and installation of equipment and materials under contract No.51 dated September 22, 2023 with those transferred by the customer.
The parties did not provide documents for the study confirming the transfer of materials and equipment, indicating the list and quantity. The inspection report dated November 20, 2024, by the plaintiff revealed the absence of equipment, materials and unfinished work under contract No. 3. However, the inspection report was signed only by the plaintiff's representative. Moreover, the plaintiff has not submitted to the court documents confirming the transfer of equipment and materials.
In this regard, the plaintiff's claim for recovery under contract No. 3 of the amount for missing equipment, materials, and work in the amount of 1,953,262 tenge is not subject to satisfaction.
On the basis of part 1 of Article 109 of the CPC, the costs of paying the state fee in proportion to the satisfied part of the claim in the amount of 48,476 tenge are to be recovered from the defendant in favor of the plaintiff. According to paragraph 1 of article 108 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the costs associated with the proceedings include the amounts to be paid to experts and specialists. By a court ruling dated March 12, 2025, payment for the examination was assigned to C kz LLP. It was established that the costs of the examination of "C kz" LLP have not been paid, and therefore, the cost of the examination in the amount of 1,100,000 tenge is subject to recovery in favor of the Institution "East Kazakhstan Independent Forensic Examination".
Guided by Articles 223-226 of the CPC, the court DECIDED: To partially satisfy the claim of the limited liability company "C kz" to the limited liability company "I P" for the recovery of debts, penalties, and losses.
Collect from the limited liability company "I P" in favor of the limited liability company "C kz" the amount of an advance of 160 681 (one hundred sixty thousand six hundred eighty one) tenge, the amount for transferred and unused equipment and materials, unfinished work in the amount of 870 535 (eight hundred seventy thousand five hundred thirty five) tenge, a fine in the amount of 584,635 (five hundred eighty-four thousand six hundred thirty-five) tenge, the cost of paying the state duty is 48,476 (forty-eight thousand four hundred seventy-six) tenge.
To dismiss the rest of the claim.
To collect from the limited liability partnership "C kz" in favor of the institution "East Kazakhstan Independent Forensic Examination" the amount for conducting a forensic examination of 1,100,000 (one million one hundred thousand) tenge.
On August 15, 2025, case No. 6399-25-00-2a/712 Judicial Board for Civil Cases of the East Kazakhstan Regional Court, Guided by subparagraph 1) of Part 1 of Article 424, subparagraph 1) of Article 425, Article 426 of THE CPC, the judicial board DECIDED: The decision of the Specialized Interdistrict Economic Court of the East Kazakhstan region dated June 12, 2025, to leave unchanged, the appeals of the parties-without satisfaction.
To collect from INFO PLUS LLP in favor of Certa kz LLP the costs of conducting a forensic examination in the amount of 294,000 (two hundred and ninety-four thousand) tenge.
Attention!
Law and Law Law Law draws your attention to the fact that this document is basic and does not always meet the requirements of a particular situation. Our lawyers are ready to assist you in legal advice, drawing up any legal document suitable for your situation.
For more information, please contact a Lawyer / Attorney by phone: +7 (708) 971-78-58; +7 (700) 978 5755, +7 (700) 978 5085.
Attorney at Law Almaty Lawyer Legal Services Legal Advice Civil Criminal Administrative Cases Disputes Protection Arbitration Law Firm Kazakhstan Law Office Court Cases
