Baltiysky Zavod recovered debts under a state contract on completing repairs on the nuclear icebreaker
The Moscow District Federal Commercial Court validated the decision to recover from the Directorate of Sea Transport Development Programs’ Public Customer $24.5 million for Baltiysky Zavod. Baltiysky Zavod is a major Russian shipyard which builds icebreakers, naval and large-capacity cargo ships. It also manufactures engineering products and energy equipment and supplies nonferrous and core-mold castings. Baltiysky Zavod seeks to recover debts under a state contract on completing repairs on the “Fiftieth Anniversary of Victory” icebreaker. Earlier in October 2011, the Ninth Commercial Court of Appeals partially satisfied the lawsuit, having reduced the recovery amount to 721.6 million rubles ($24.48 million) from 1.2 billion rubles ($40.7 million). The court dismissed the claims brought against the Finance Ministry and the Federal Agency for Sea and Inland Water Transport, whose competence covers the Directorate.
According to the plaintiff, it entered into a contract with the directorate in February 2003 to outfit the icebreaker. The vessel was built from 1989 onwards and its equipment was outdated. The shipyard reviewed the equipment in 2003-2005 and purchased new hardware. The work was then accepted and paid for by the customer. Later, the shipyard began conducting major operations under the contract, which the customer only paid for partially. The Directorate of Sea Transport Development Programs claimed that the contract price was initially 2.5 billion rubles ($83.83 million). An additional agreement worth 164 million rubles ($5.56 million) was later concluded. Some 2.664 billion rubles ($90.4 million) were paid to the plaintiff, but the defendant said no additional agreements were signed. Respondent added that Baltiysky Zavod was afforded the opportunity to voice its claims within 20 days from the signing of the delivery-acceptance act, but the shipyard never did so.
Meanwhile, Baltiysky Zavod claims that the letter notifying the party of the additional work was submitted in January 2007. The defendant said it did not give consent to conduct the repairs.
All materials are protected by copyright of TV&P and the provider of the content RAPSI. If you need further information on the subject, contact Kristoffer Svendsen.