Disputes related to the invalidity of the supply contract, no evidence has a pre-determined force, they are subject to evaluation in conjunction with other evidence.

K LLP filed a lawsuit against P LLP to invalidate the supply agreement dated November 6, 2014 No. 02 and cancel the invoice dated November 6, 2014 No. 00000000006, arguing that the contract was not concluded between the parties. The claim was denied by the decision of the specialized interdistrict Economic Court of the South Kazakhstan region dated November 27, 2017. By the decision of the Judicial Board for Civil Cases of the South Kazakhstan Regional Court dated February 20, 2018, the court's decision remained unchanged. The Judicial Board for Civil Cases of the Supreme Court annulled the judicial acts of local courts and terminated the proceedings regarding the cancellation of invoice No. 00000000006 dated November 6, 2014. A new decision was made regarding the rejection of the claim of LLP "K" and the delivery contract dated November 6, 2014 No. 02, concluded between LLP "K" and LLP "P", was declared invalid. The petition of "K" LLP was partially satisfied on the following grounds. It follows from the case file that on November 6, 2014, the parties signed a supply agreement No. 02 for the supply and processing of sunflower seeds in the amount of 160,000 tons. According to expert opinion No. 4192 dated November 23, 2017, signatures on behalf of K. are available in the following documents submitted for the study: 1) Contract No. 02 dated November 6, 2014; 2) Appendix No. 1 to Contract No. 2 dated November 6, 2014; 3) Invoice No. 00000000006 dated November 6, 2014; 4) Invoice No. 6 dated November 6, 2014, executed using preliminary technical preparation techniques such as how to: copy the signature to the light; reproduce the signature by pressing on the strokes of the original signature; reproduction of the signature by pencil preparation followed by tracing.

Meanwhile, these circumstances cast doubt on the conclusion of the contract, but the local courts concluded that the contract was sealed by the plaintiff, so there are no grounds for declaring it invalid. In accordance with article 72 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan (hereinafter referred to as the CPC), each party must prove the circumstances to which it refers as the grounds for its claims and objections. In accordance with Article 147 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan (hereinafter referred to as the Civil Code), transactions are recognized as actions of citizens and legal entities aimed at establishing, changing or terminating civil rights and obligations. To commit it, by virtue of paragraph 3 of Article 148 of the Civil Code, it is necessary to express the agreed will of the two parties. According to paragraph 2 of Article 157 of the Civil Code, a transaction is declared invalid if the requirements for the form, content and participants of the transaction, as well as for their freedom of expression, are violated on the grounds established by the Civil Code or other legislative acts. By virtue of Articles 16 and 77 of the CPC, no evidence has a pre-determined force, it is subject to evaluation in conjunction with other evidence. Articles 41 and 53 of the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On Limited and Additional Liability Partnerships" provide that the director of the partnership, being the sole executive body, acts on behalf of a legal entity without a power of attorney in civil relations. The courts found that the director of LLP "K" did not sign the contract and the invoice, his signatures were falsified. Both companies, K LLP and P LLP, were serviced by the same accountant, who had access to the seals of the parties. The accountant of these partnerships, M., by virtue of the duties assigned to her, is a financially responsible person. According to paragraph 4-1 of Article 21 of the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On Payments and Money Transfers", if the transaction amount between legal entities exceeds 1,000 monthly calculation indices (hereinafter referred to as MCI), payment is made by wire transfer. It was established that, according to the invoice, "K" LLP supplied sunflower seeds and cleaned them with equipment. The amount of the disputed contract is 20 million tenge, that is, it exceeds 1,000 MCI. However, clause 2.5 of the contract specifies cash payment for the delivered goods. Thus, the applicant's arguments that all settlements with counterparties are made in a non-cash manner deserve attention, therefore, knowing that a legal entity may be held administratively liable, K LLP would not specify the above-mentioned clause of the agreement when signing the transaction.

The court also found that "K" LLP bought and imported equipment for cleaning and drying seeds to Kazakhstan only in 2016. Consequently, without the appropriate equipment in 2014, K LLP could not assume responsibility for cleaning and drying sunflower seeds in such quantities, as it did not have the necessary equipment. The stated circumstances indicate the inconsistency of the conclusions of the local courts. In addition, the defendant did not provide the courts with evidence of the sale of goods in the amount of 160,000 tons. The specified number is equal to 3,200 freight wagons, which is about forty railway trains and the volume of harvest over several years. Despite this, the local courts did not doubt the authenticity of the sale, as well as the receipt of the goods by these enterprises. In accordance with subparagraph 1) of Article 277 of the CPC, the court terminates the proceedings if the case is not subject to consideration in civil proceedings. It is established that the plaintiff demands to cancel the invoice indicating the invalidation of a specific delivery contract arising from the binding legal relationship between the parties. The invoice itself contains no signs of a transaction, is just an accounting document, evidence in a case that is not legally contested, does not in itself give rise to rights and obligations, does not essentially resolve issues related to anyone's rights, freedoms and interests, and does not impose on anyone any responsibilities. It follows from the above that a claim regarding the cancellation of an invoice is not subject to consideration in civil proceedings. 

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