The statement of claim for the recovery of material damage must contain clear evidence that determines that this damage came from the illegal actions of the defendant
The plaintiff of the Republican state - owned enterprise" Shieli District branch of the State Center for pension payments " (hereinafter referred to as the state - owned enterprise) filed a lawsuit against the defendant T. with a claim for the recovery of overpaid 542,873 tenge. By the decision of the Shieli District Court of Kyzylorda region dated April 27, 2012, the statement of claim was dismissed. The case was not considered on appeal and Cassation. The plaintiff did not agree with the decision of the court in the case and applied to the supervisory Judicial Board of the Supreme Court with a request to cancel it and make a new decision on the satisfaction of the claim. The supervisory judicial board heard the opinion of the plaintiff's representative in the case in support of the application, the prosecutor's conclusion that the court decision is subject to cancellation, checked the case documents and concluded that the disputed judicial act is subject to cancellation due to the following grounds. In accordance with Part 3 of Article 387 of the code of Civil Procedure of the Republic of Kazakhstan (hereinafter referred to as the code of Civil Procedure), a significant violation of material norms or procedural law is the basis for reviewing decisions, rulings, decisions of the court that have entered into legal force in the order of supervision. According to the case documents, a resident of Shieli District of Kyzylorda region, born on October 11, 1942, T. For the birth and upbringing of 8 children, he was awarded the Order of "maternal Glory" II degree, and in accordance with paragraph 9 of Article 4 of the law of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated April 5, 1999 No. 365-1, the benefit was assigned and included in a special account. During the audit, it was found that this allowance was paid simultaneously to T., a resident of Almaly rural district, Shieli district, born in 1935. Therefore, the plaintiff's representative indicated that T., born in 1935, received the state benefit illegally, and asked the defendant to recover 542,873 tenge in favor of the state. In the application submitted by the supervisory order, the representative of the plaintiff gave arguments that the District Court did not consider the case comprehensively, incorrectly applied the law. After examining the evidence collected in the case and the arguments of the petition, the supervisory judicial board comes to the conclusion that there are no legal grounds for canceling the decision of the District Court. In accordance with the requirements of Article 65 of the civil code, each party must prove the circumstances to which it refers as the basis for its claims and objections.
The statement of claim for the recovery of material damage must contain clear evidence that determines that this damage came from the illegal actions of the defendant
When filing a claim for the recovery of material damage, the plaintiff did not submit to the court concrete evidence that this damage came from the illegal actions of the defendant T. The conclusion of the inspection made cannot serve as a basis for proving the guilt of the defendant. The defendant T. in the statement sent to the court, indicated that this error was not on his part, he did not recognize the statement of claim. The representative of the plaintiff said that at a meeting of the supervisory judicial board, employees of the Pension Payment Center who allowed illegal payment of state funds were dismissed from their jobs. The legal basis for the recovery of (property) and (or) non-property) damage caused by illegal actions (inaction) to property or non-property goods and rights of citizens and legal entities is given in Article 917 of the Civil Code. The plaintiff's representative defendant T. did not justify by appropriate evidence what illegal actions he committed against the interests of another person protected by law.In accordance with the requirements of Part 2 of Article 364 of the code of criminal procedure, the force of a valid court decision on its merits cannot be canceled on unsubstantiated, superficial considerations. The plaintiff's application is subject to dismissal due to the fact that it is not based on obvious evidence. At the same time, a disputed judicial act on the basis of the data specified in the applicant's application may not be recognized as illegal.
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
