RESPONSE TO THE STATEMENT OF CLAIM FOR RECOVERY OF PAYMENT FOR SERVICES
To the District Court No. 2 of the Almaly District of Almaty
Plaintiff: A.G.T.IIN ..,Residential address: Almaty Region, KarasaiDistrict,
Irgeli Village, land plot quarter .., plot ..,Mobile phone: +7 775 ..
Defendant: S.A. LLP, represented by its
Director Z.A.M.BIN ..534/92 S. Avenue, apartment/office ..,Almaty
Attorneys for the Defendant under a Power of Attorney:
Attorney G.T. Sarzhanov,Tel.: 87085785758,Attorney S.D.
Nigmetov,Tel.: 87009785755
RESPONSE
Civil Case No. 7520-26-00-2/10437, brought by Aoy G.T. against S.A. LLP for recovery of material damages and compensation for moral harm, is currently pending before the District Court No. 2 of the Almaly District of Almaty.
The Defendant does not admit the Plaintiff's claims.
Regarding the claim for recovery of KZT 260,000 paid for the services rendered
The dental implant procedure was performed in accordance with international recommendations and guidelines in the field of dental implantology.
No defects or abnormalities of the dentition are identified in the image submitted by the Plaintiff to the Court.
The Plaintiff's allegations concerning violations of sanitary standards, including allegations that assistants dropped instruments and that the physician left the treatment room to obtain the necessary materials, are unsubstantiated and do not correspond to the actual circumstances.
The alleged consequences, including severe swelling, a non-healing wound, and pain in the healthy adjacent tooth, have not been supported by any evidence.
The alleged damage to the root of the adjacent tooth has likewise not been established.
Headaches, elevated blood pressure, dizziness, nausea, facial bruising, impaired nutrition, and the alleged inability to work fully are not causally related to the dental implantation procedure, and there is no evidence confirming such a causal relationship.
The Plaintiff was informed by the physician that there could be no 100% guarantee that the implant would successfully integrate.
Accordingly, the cost of the dental implantation service that was rendered and paid for is not subject to reimbursement.
Regarding the claim for recovery of KZT 1,413,000 in subsequent treatment expenses
This claim is unfounded and should be dismissed.
The documents submitted by the Plaintiff concerning the cost of treatment at G.D. Dental Clinic do not constitute official documents, bear neither a signature nor a seal, and it is impossible to establish the legal organizational form of the said dental clinic.
Moreover, the claim for recovery of treatment expenses concerns expenses that may be incurred in the future, which, in the Defendant's view, is impermissible.
Regarding the claim for compensation for moral harm in the amount of KZT 1,000,000
This claim is unfounded and should be dismissed.
Regarding Forensic Medical Examination Report No. 02-450 dated December 25, 2025
The Court is respectfully requested to take into account that the expert report states that “the main risks include inflammation, infection, resorption, or rejection of the implant.”
The report also states that “even if the above requirements are complied with, the risk of complications remains high, and the final outcome is not always predictable.”
Pursuant to Part 7 of Article 92 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, an expert opinion is not binding upon the Court.
Pursuant to Part 1 of Article 68 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, each item of evidence shall be assessed with regard to its relevance, admissibility, and reliability, while all evidence taken together shall be assessed in terms of its sufficiency for resolving the civil case.
Pursuant to Article 72 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, each party must prove the circumstances to which it refers as the basis for its claims and objections.
Pursuant to Part 1 of Article 113 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, upon the application of the party in whose favor the judgment has been rendered, the Court shall award against the other party the expenses actually incurred by that party for payment of the services of its representative (or representatives) who participated in the proceedings and was not in an employment relationship with that party.
For property claims, the total amount of such expenses shall not exceed ten percent of the awarded portion of the claim.
For non-property claims, the amount of such expenses shall be recovered within reasonable limits but shall not exceed three hundred monthly calculation indices.
S.A. LLP has incurred expenses in the amount of KZT 1,000,000 for legal representation, which is confirmed by the Legal Services Agreement, the Supplementary Agreement thereto, and payment orders.
Based on the foregoing, the Defendant respectfully requests that the Court:
- dismiss the claims of Aoy G.T. against S.A. LLP in their entirety;
- award in favor of S.A. LLP and against Aoy G.T. legal representation expenses in the amount of KZT 1,000,000.
Attachments:
- Legal Services Agreement;
- Supplementary Agreement to the Legal Services Agreement;
- Two payment orders.
Director of S.A. LLP__________________ Z.A.M.
May 6, 2026
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
