Moreover, according to the arbitral award, Vest-Resurs SRL would have suffered major damages due to the suspension of the deliveries of an insignificant part of the fertilizer.
As a result, the arbitration awarded the buyer the right to compensation amounting to 1.3 million euros. Thus, if SIA Fertco had received the accepted compensations, the company would have been left with debts to Vest-Resurs SRL of about 624,000 euros.
SIA Fertco considered the arbitral award to be illegal and challenged it. However, the first instance court rejected SIA Fertco’s request for annulment of the arbitral award. By the decision of the Chisinau Court of Appeal of April 22, 2021, the decision of the arbitration court was partially annulled, so that SIA Fertco is no longer obliged to compensate the damage claimed by Vest-Resurs SRL, and, respectively, only Moldovan companies register debts to SIA Fertco . .
2015 review request and correspondence
However, both Moldovan companies recently challenged the decision of the Chisinau Court of Appeal in a request for review, to be examined by the Chisinau Court of Appeal on December 2, 2021, by Judge Pahopol Anatol’s panel, Cojocaru Olga. and Ruxanda Powder.
The companies from the Republic of Moldova claim that after announcing the decision of the Court of Appeal of April 22, 2021, they found out about some new circumstances, important for solving the case. This is a 2015 correspondence between the parties involved in this contract and litigation, as well as another company that is part of the same concern – SRL Agrogled.
In the request for review, SRL Vest-Resurs and Tarservice-Companie SRL state that this correspondence (which preceded the conclusion of the contracts with SIA Fertco, no. . -Companie SRL and SIA Fertco ”.
The companies that “in this case there are all the grounds for annulment based on art. . in violation of procedural rules ”.
Representatives of SIA Fertco say that “the request to review the sea more with a covert appeal, and the so-called new circumstances – a simple pretext invented by three affiliated companies, in order to invoke the basis for review provided in art. 449 letter b) The code. of civil procedure. The fact of submitting an application for consideration without any legal basis indicates that the companies from the Republic of Moldova act in bad faith, ready to resort to any means to avoid paying the debt ”.
According to the representatives of SIA Fertco, such a case calls into question the credibility of the Moldovan judiciary by any foreign economic operator and there is a danger of an act of injustice, which can be committed in the courts of the Republic of Moldova.
However, a potential illegal solution, adopted on the basis of the request for review, could lead to a new conviction of the Republic of Moldova in the European Court of Human Rights, as was the case in COMPCAR SRO v. Slovakia, where the Court specified one of the issues. The fundamental principle of the rule of law is the principle of legal certainty, the proper rule of law is ultimately decided in a dispute, and their judgment must not be called into question.
The Court also considered that the review of final and binding decisions should not be treated as a disguised appeal.