Review of a claim for recovery of material damage and moral damage for dental services
To the District Court No. 2 of Almaly district of Almaty
plaintiff: A.G.T.
IIN ..,
residential address: Almaty region, Karasai district,
Irgeli village, uch. sq., uch., cell phone + 7 775 ..
Defendant: S.A.. LLP, represented by Director Z.A.M.
BEAN ..
Almaty, S. ave., 534/92, sq/office ..
representatives of the defendant by proxy:
lawyer Sarzhanov G.T., tel. 87085785758, lawyer
Nigmetov S.D., phone: 87009785755
review of the claim.
The civil case No. 7520-26-00-2/10437 is pending in the proceedings of the District Court No. 2 of Almaly district of Almaty on the claim of A.O.G.T. to LLP "SA" for recovery of material damage and moral damage.
I do not recognize the plaintiff's claims.
Upon request for the recovery of paid services in the amount of 260,000 tenge. The dental implantation service was performed in accordance with international recommendations in the field of dental implantation. No defects or defects of the dentition were found in the photograph provided by the plaintiff to the court. The plaintiff's arguments about the violation of sanitary standards, the fact that assistants dropped tools, the doctor himself left the office in search of the necessary materials, are unreliable. The fact that there were consequences in the form of severe swelling, non-healing wounds, and pain in a healthy neighboring tooth has not been confirmed. Damage to the root of the adjacent tooth has also not been confirmed. Headaches, high blood pressure, dizziness, nausea, bruising on the face, eating disorders and inability to work properly are not causally related to the dental implantation, there is no supporting evidence for this. The plaintiff was warned by the doctor that there is no guarantee of 100% survival of the implant. Thus, the cost of the paid dental implantation service is non-refundable.
Regarding the requirement to collect expenses in the amount of 1,413,000 tenge for subsequent treatment. This claim is unfounded and cannot be satisfied. The documents submitted by the plaintiff on the cost of treatment at G.D. Dentistry are not an official document, they do not have a signature and seal, and it is impossible to establish the organizational and legal form of this dentistry. Moreover, the demands for recovery of the amount for treatment imply expenses in the future, which from our point of view is unacceptable.
Regarding the recovery of compensation for moral damage in the amount of 1,000 000 tenge. This claim is unfounded and cannot be satisfied.
Regarding the conclusion of the forensic medical examination No. 02-450 dated 12/25/2025, I ask the court to take into account that the conclusion states that "the main risks include inflammation, infection, resorption or rejection of the implant." The conclusion also reflects that "even if the above points are followed, the risk of complications remains high, and the final result is not always predictable." According to Part 7 of Article 92 of the CPC RK, the expert's opinion is not binding on the court.
According to Part 1 of Article 68 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, each evidence is subject to assessment taking into account its relevance, admissibility, reliability, and all the evidence collected together is sufficient to resolve a civil case.
72 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, each party must prove the circumstances to which it refers as the grounds for its claims and objections.
According to Part 1 of Article 113 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, at the request of the party in whose favor the decision was made, the court awards, on the other hand, the costs incurred by her to pay for the assistance of a representative (several representatives) who participated in the process and is not in an employment relationship with this party, in the amount of the costs actually incurred by the party. For property claims, the total amount of these expenses should not exceed ten percent of the satisfied portion of the claim. According to non-property requirements, the amount of expenses is collected within reasonable limits, but should not exceed three hundred monthly calculation indices.
"S.A." LLP incurred expenses for the assistance of a representative in the amount of 1,000 000 tenge, which is confirmed by the legal assistance agreement, an additional agreement to the agreement and payment orders.
Based on the above, I ask:
- to refuse to satisfy the claim of A.O.G.T. to S.A. LLP in full;
- to collect from A.O.G.T. in favor of S.A. LLP the costs of paying for the assistance of a representative in the amount of 1,000 000 tenge.
Director of LLP ".A.e." Z.A.M.
05/06/2026
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
