THE SUN EXPLAINED THE CALCULATION OF THE LIMITATION PERIOD WHEN CHANGING JURISDICTION

In situations where the plaintiff, through no fault of his own, filed a lawsuit in a court that does not correspond to the defendant's address, the statute of limitations must be suspended from the moment the claim is filed. This is stated in the explanation of the Civil Board of the Supreme Court in the case involving Sberbank.

So, the financial conglomerate wanted to terminate the loan agreement with a certain person and appealed to the court with a request to recover 5.8 million rubles of debt from him. Sberbank appealed several times to the Zhukovsky and Ramensky courts, while indicating the defendant's address taken from the loan agreement and already irrelevant. The case was never reviewed because the debtor did not respond to the calls sent.

When the case once again reached the Zhukovsky court, the instance included the time of consideration of the case by the Ramenskoye Court in the statute of limitations, a delay was formed. The appeal and cassation agreed with this.

The Supreme Court also pointed out that the calculation of the limitation period was carried out incorrectly. According to the Civil Collegium, it does not flow from the moment of the appeal to the court, if it is accepted for production. The time from filing a claim to leaving it without consideration is not included in the statute of limitations, and the courts should find out the reasons for sending a claim to the wrong address.

So Sberbank's claim went to the next consideration.