Private Clients
A wide range of services for individuals in general civil litigation, including family, property, and inheritance disputes.
Termination of a lifetime care agreement with dependency and return of the residential property to the client
Our team took on the case at the cassation appeal stage. The plaintiff and C Cases' client, an elderly woman, insisted on terminating a lifetime care agreement with dependency, as the defendant systematically failed to fulfill their obligations: not providing her with a decent standard of living, as stipulated in the contract. By the time our team joined the project, two court decisions had already been rendered against the client. Therefore, the key task was to reverse the unfavorable course of the proceedings and secure a case review.
To achieve this goal, the team needed to
- develop a strategy aimed at challenging previously rendered court decisions;
- identify violations of procedural norms committed during previous court proceedings;
- challenge the credibility and inconsistency of the defendant's key arguments;
- support their position with case law;
- prove that the support was either not provided or provided in a lesser amount than stipulated in the contract.
The prenuptial agreement was upheld, and the client's assets worth over 1.5 billion rubles were protected.
During the re-examination at the appellate stage, our team represented the client's interests in a dispute with his ex-wife regarding the invalidation of a prenuptial agreement and the division of assets worth over 1.5 billion rubles. The ex-wife argued that the prenuptial agreement placed her in an extremely disadvantageous position, as all assets remained the husband's property. After the cassation court overturned previous judicial acts, the case was sent for a new review, which created significant procedural risks for the client. The team's primary objective was to uphold the prenuptial agreement and prevent the division of property under the statutory regime.
To achieve this goal, the team conducted comprehensive legal work, which included the following steps:
- Analysis of the prenuptial agreement, the circumstances of its execution, the structure of the acquisition of the disputed assets, and case materials.
- Confirmation of the fact that the disputed real estate properties were acquired using borrowed funds, the obligations for which were effectively fulfilled by the client.
- Justification of the transparency of the agreement's execution procedure — evidence was provided demonstrating no signs of abuse of rights by the client during the signing of the prenuptial agreement.
- Refutation of the plaintiff's arguments — the ex-wife's key arguments were challenged, proving their invalidity and the lack of legal grounds for declaring the agreement void.
Claims for interest recovery under Article 395 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation reduced 26-fold
The client's ex-wife filed a lawsuit demanding over 800,000 rubles in interest for the use of her funds. The claim was based on a prenuptial agreement, which stipulated that the client was obliged to transfer to his ex-wife, within one month of the divorce, an amount in rubles equivalent to 4,000 US dollars. Due to the delay in payment, the plaintiff calculated interest under Article 395 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation and sought to recover it. The task for C Cases' lawyers was to minimize the financial consequences for the client and achieve the maximum possible reduction in the amount claimed.
During the proceedings, our team:
- argued that the plaintiff had missed the statute of limitations for part of the claims;
- drew the court's attention to the moratorium on bankruptcy proceedings, during which penalties and compensatory financial sanctions are not accrued;
- identified errors in the interest calculations presented by the plaintiff;
- presented an alternative, correct calculation. This comprehensive approach allowed for a significant adjustment to the amount claimed.
Defending the validity of apartment assignment agreements
The opposing party filed a lawsuit seeking to invalidate two consecutive assignment agreements for the right to claim an apartment and to restore their right to the disputed property. They argued that the transaction with our client was allegedly entered into due to fraud, and thus should be declared void. Essentially, the case concerned the application of civil law provisions regarding the invalidity of transactions made due to fraud.
Our team built its defense on a key procedural principle — the burden of proof for the circumstances a party relies on rests with that party. We consistently demonstrated that:
- the opposing party failed to provide proper and admissible evidence of fraud;
- they could not have been mistaken about the legal nature and terms of the agreements;
- there were no actions on the client's part aimed at intentional deception;
- the transactions were entered into voluntarily and with the parties' full awareness of their legal consequences.
Individual. Division of jointly acquired marital property.
820 million ₽
After the cassation court overturned the decision to deny the opponent's claims for the division of jointly acquired marital property totaling over 1.5 billion rubles and remanded the case for a new hearing, the C Cases legal team was tasked with securing a second denial of the claims.