Inmar Legal Ltd disputed damages under lease agreement

Landlord’s claim for compensation of damages under lease agreement found unjustified

The lawyers of Inmar Legal Ltd successfully contested the damages claimed by the landlord against the firm’s client under a lease agreement. The client, who sought the firm’s assistance, had previously entered into a lease for a business premises. Following the initiation of renovation work, a dispute arose between the client and the landlord regarding the design decisions for the renovation, which ultimately necessitated the client’s vacating of the premises.

Initially, the parties signed a lease agreement that did not document the condition of the premises at the time of handover, nor did it specify the nature of the renovations the tenant intended to undertake. All arrangements were made verbally. Several months later, the firm’s client received a lawsuit demanding approximately 1 million rubles. The landlord sought compensation for damages allegedly caused to the premises by the tenant, which included certain reconfigurations and the demolition of a weapons room.

However, the firm’s client received the premises with “bare” walls and had not undertaken any actions during the tenancy that could have caused harm to the landlord.

The firm’s position based on lack of evidence of damages under the lease agreement

The firm’s lawyers evaluated the evidence presented by the plaintiff and prepared a comprehensive legal position. During the proceedings in the first instance court, the lawyers successfully demonstrated that the plaintiff failed to provide sufficient arguments regarding the claimed damages, nor did they present adequate information about the condition of the premises at the time of occupancy. Additionally, the firm’s lawyers were able to establish that the weapons room mentioned by the plaintiff did not exist in the premises in question. As a result, the court ruled in favor of the firm’s client.

Nikita Safin, Senior Associate emphasizes the importance of a well-drafted lease agreement: “Most litigation can be avoided by adopting a preventative approach. It is advisable to consult with a qualified attorney at the very outset of the property search process. They can assist in mitigating risks during property selection and in drafting a proper agreement, which will help prevent disputes in the future, saving time and money on litigation.”

In the present case, the court was inclined to appoint a forensic examination due to the plaintiff’s failure to provide adequate evidence. Such an initiative by the court is contemplated by current legislation; however, a forensic examination is a lengthy process that can take up to six months. Therefore, it was also crucial for us to demonstrate that the involvement of experts in this case was unwarranted: the condition of the premises clearly had not deteriorated, as the plaintiff subsequently began leasing it at a higher price, implying there was no intention to restore a weapons room. Furthermore, the very existence of this room was contradicted by a representative from the competent authority involved in the legal proceedings.

The outcome of this case was a favorable decision for the client; however, all of this could have been avoided had there been a handover act clearly detailing the condition of the premises, including photographs thereof.