Arbitration. The court satisfied the demands of our client to recover funds in full under the contract for drilling wells, despite the fact that the executive documentation was not presented to the defendant by OUR CLIENT

The plaintiff's interests were represented by attorney Boris Andreevich Grozny.

The basis for the appeal to the court was the fact that, in the opinion of the defendant, the work by OUR PRINCIPALS had not been delivered on the day of the dispute hearing; the well passport signed by the Customer was not properly executed in accordance with building codes; the executive documentation was not transferred; the disputed wells were drilled as part of the company's execution of a state order at a state facility and are part of the heating system of a cultural and leisure center; the general contractor of XXX LLC on 01.03.2023 of the said facility sent a demand to the Defendant for the provision of executive documentation for the work performed, including the well passports; the Defendant cannot deliver the work to XXX LLC without the relevant documents, which the Plaintiff is obliged to execute.

The court, satisfying OUR claims, stated the following

It follows from the case materials that the construction project "Pogranichny Cultural and Leisure Center" in the village of Medovoye, Bagrationovsky Urban District, has been completed.

There is no evidence in the case materials that the results of the work performed by the Contractor under the contract do not comply with the building codes and regulations for this type of work and are not used for their intended purpose.

Therefore, the Defendant's demands under the Request to the Plaintiff dated 02/28/2023 do not comply with the terms of the contract.

According to Article 726 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the contractor is obliged to transfer to the customer, along with the result of the work, information regarding the operation or other use of the subject of the contract, if this is provided for by the contract, or the nature of the information is such that without it it is impossible to use the result of the work for the purposes specified in the contract.

According to the meaning of the said norm, the mere fact of failure to submit executive documentation cannot be grounds for refusing to pay for the work performed. In this case, the Customer must prove that the absence of executive documentation, on the transfer of which he insists (and the need to transfer which is not directly specified in the contract), excludes the possibility of using the result of the work for its intended purpose.

Since the work under the contract has been completed and delivered by the Plaintiff and accepted by the Defendant under the acceptance certificate for completed work No. 028 dated 18.10.2022, the Defendant has not made any comments on the quality, volume and timing of the work, the result of the work performed by the Contractor is used, and the work has not been paid for by the Defendant without reason.

On the day of the consideration of the case in court, the Defendant, in violation of Art. 65 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, did not provide evidence of payment for the work under the contract, therefore, the specified amount is subject to recovery from the Defendant in favor of the Plaintiff.