Is it necessary to enter into a written supply agreement with a counterparty for multiple deliveries of goods? Is it possible to get by with just bills?

If an institution provides paid services, it must ensure that the transaction is properly documented in order to protect itself from any subsequent claims from various regulatory authorities, as well as from possible property losses. Is it necessary to conclude an agreement with the customer in the form of one document, or will it be possible to limit it to, for example, just issuing an invoice? The risks associated with providing services without a contract will be discussed below.

Provision of services: essential nuances

In situations where the subject of the contract is indicated by an indication of a specific activity, the range of proposed actions on the part of the contractor is determined on the basis of negotiations preceding the conclusion of the document, as well as correspondence and practices that have been established in mutual relations between the parties. In this case, custom of business practice is also taken into account along with the subsequent conduct of the parties and the like. All necessary clarifications regarding this issue are given in the information letter of the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court. The direct subject of the contract for the provision of paid services is determined in Article No. 779 of the civil legislation. According to the relevant contract, the contractor is obliged to provide his services on assignment, that is, to perform certain actions, carrying out specific activities, and the customer, in turn, must pay for everything financially. This is how a home handyman works.

General information

About concluding contracts

Concluded agreement

According to general rules, the conditions that determine the subject of the agreement are considered essential. Among other things, these include those specified in the law or other legal acts. It turns out that the legislation describes the requirements and conditions necessary for the contract that relate to the conclusion of the agreement.

REFERENCE! Based on the application of one of the parties, an agreement must ultimately be reached.

Features of service provision

In cases where the subject of the contract is the indication of a specific activity, the possible actions of the contractor are determined by the negotiations that preceded the conclusion of the contract, as well as correspondence and practices established in the relationship of the parties. Here, the custom of business practice is taken into account, along with the further behavior of the parties, and so on. Clarifications that may be needed on this issue are provided in the information letter of the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court. According to the contract, the contractor must provide his services according to the assignment, that is, perform specific actions by completing specific work. The customer must pay for this work.

When will the contract be concluded?

The legislation does not call additional conditions of this type of agreement as essential. It turns out that the contract will be considered concluded if it provides a list of actions that the contractor must perform or work that he must do. The contract is considered concluded at the moment when the person who sent the offer receives its acceptance. This is prescribed in civil law.

REFERENCE! Each offer must have serious terms of the signed contract.

About the features of the process

Need for writing

Legal entities entering into transactions with each other and with citizens must be formalized in writing. The agreement can be drawn up by one person, but it must be signed and approved by both parties. In addition, it can be concluded through the exchange of documents via mail, electronic, telegraphic, telephone, teletype or other communications. In this case, it is important to establish precisely that the required document was received from the party required under the contract. In addition, the written form of the contract can be considered complied with if the person who received the offer within the prescribed period has carried out work to fulfill the terms of the document specified in the offer.

Possible actions

For example, when fulfilling the terms of the contract, the following events could occur:

— the goods have been shipped;

— the services were provided;

— all necessary work was completed in full;

- payment of the appropriate amount has been made.

REFERENCE! The law, legal acts and rules specified in the offer may provide for some other requirements.

The question often arises whether it is possible to provide services without concluding a contract. The legislation does not require full compliance with the conditions in order to recognize the activity on the part of the offeree as acceptance. It is enough that the person receiving the offer or contractual project begins to implement it according to the conditions specified in the document. It is important to complete everything within the period specified for acceptance.

If we consider an agreement for the provision of services for a fee, then the actual use of services must be considered as acceptance of the offer. Moreover, it must be proposed by the party performing the work. Such relationships are considered contractual precisely for this reason. The question is whether this will apply to the provision of services without a contract.

Is a contract required?

It turns out that in order to recognize the fact of establishing legal relations between two parties, the existence of an agreement is not necessary in the form of one document signed by the persons. If the participants in civil legal relations perform actions related by law to the emergence of contractual rights and obligations, it indicates that an agreement has been concluded between them.

Necessity of writing

Any transactions of legal entities that are carried out among themselves and with citizens must be completed in ordinary written form. An agreement can be concluded by drawing up one document, which is signed and approved by both parties. In addition, it can be concluded by exchanging papers through mail, telegraph, teletype, telephone, electronic or other communications. The main thing is that, as part of the transfer of information, it is possible to reliably establish that the required document comes from the party to the contract.

In addition, according to the general rule, the written form of the contract is considered to be complied with if the person who received the offer within the period established for its acceptance took steps to implement the terms of the document that were specified in the offer.

What is the amount of the supply contract?

We are interested in the question: is it possible not to enter into contracts with suppliers for an amount of no more than 100,000 rubles, if the supply is not one-time, is it enough to issue only TORG-12 invoices? Doesn't this affect the deduction of VAT if there is no supply agreement? On the first question, according to Art. 153 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation (hereinafter referred to as the Civil Code of the Russian Federation), transactions recognize the actions of citizens and legal entities aimed at establishing, changing or terminating civil rights and obligations. Transactions are made orally or in writing (simple or notarial) (Clause 1 of Article 158 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation). A transaction in writing must be concluded by drawing up a document expressing its contents and signed by the person or persons entering into the transaction, or their duly authorized persons (clause 1 of Article 160 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation).

What actions can be taken?

For example, as part of the fulfillment of the conditions, the following could happen:

• The goods have been shipped.
• The provision of services took place.
• All proposed work was fully completed.
• The corresponding amount has been paid.

Any other requirements may be provided for by law, legal acts or specified in the offer. Is it possible to provide services without concluding a contract? Let's figure it out.

In order to recognize actions on the part of the offeree as acceptance, the law does not require full fulfillment of the conditions. It is sufficient that the person who receives the offer or contractual project begins to implement it in accordance with the conditions specified in the document. Moreover, it is important to complete everything within the strictly established deadline for acceptance.

In relation to the agreement for the provision of paid services, it is emphasized that the actual use of services must be considered as acceptance of the offer that was offered by the party performing the work. For this reason, these relations should be considered as contractual. Is this the provision of services without a contract?

What to do if the employer refuses to conclude an employment contract

If the employer for any reason refuses to draw up an employment contract, the employee may act in one of the following ways:

1. Insist on formalizing the relationship.
2. Write a letter of resignation.
3. Continue to work without official registration, while simultaneously collecting documents with which it will be possible to prove the existence of an employment relationship.

How to prove the fact of work without registration

The following can be used as evidence of the fact of work without registration:

1. Medical record, provided that the company requires regular medical examinations.
2. A card statement indicating regular transfer of funds.
3. Waybills if the employee worked as a driver.
4. Power of attorney for the right to perform any actions.
5. Invitations to work in any form.
6. Other documents from the company that contain the signature of the employee or his last name.

Contacting the labor inspectorate

If the boss refuses to formalize the contract, the employee can file a complaint with the labor inspectorate.
This can be done through the website or by visiting the territorial office. The complaint must include the following information:

1. Place of work.
2. Information about the manager.
3. Type of violation of rights.
4. Options to correct the situation.
5. Confirmation of the fact that there is no employment relationship.
6. Papers confirming the arguments set out in the complaint.

A contract is not required

Thus, in order to recognize the fact that legal relations have been established between both parties, it is not at all necessary that the agreement itself be in the form of a single document that was signed by the parties. In the event that participants in civil legal relations perform actions with which the law associates the emergence of contractual obligations and rights, this means that a civil law document of the type that corresponds to the legal nature of these measures was drawn up and concluded between them.

Why do you need a contract for the supply of products?

Disputes between supplier and buyer regarding whether a contract has been concluded represent a civil risk. An unscrupulous buyer may refuse to accept the goods, demanding a refund of the advance payment, or accept the goods, but not pay the rest of the money in the case of an advance payment, citing the absence of an agreement.

An unscrupulous supplier with the same reasoning may refuse to ship the goods and not return the advance payment. Although, of course, such situations can arise even if there is an agreement signed by both parties to the transaction.

Risk assessment

Now let's look at the fact of concluding the document. Legal risks in this case may be associated with the impossibility of establishing the fact that both parties have reached an agreement on the subject of the contract being concluded. That is, it may not be possible to confirm that a contract for the provision of services was actually concluded between certain parties to the transaction. The solution to this problem directly depends on the content of the documents that were drawn up by the parties. In this case, it is taken into account whether the documentation reflects the actions carried out by the contractor with a sufficient level of specificity that would allow one to come to the conclusion that an agreement for the provision of services was actually concluded between the persons.

Bilateral act

They confirm the actual provision of services by the contractor thanks to a drawn up bilateral act, which reflects the content of all actions performed. Thus, the document indicates the actions that were performed by the performer. A DIYer can also use this. There is no unified form of this act. Consequently, it is absolutely not necessary to include the details of the contract in the act, especially the date and number. It will be enough in the act to simply detail the services provided so that from the content of this document it is clearly visible which specific actions were performed by the contractor and which were accepted by the customer when providing services without a contract.

Actual actions taken

The fact that the contractor performs certain actions along with the implementation of certain activities, which can be characterized as services, as well as their acceptance by the customer, directly indicates the conclusion of the relevant agreement by both parties. In judicial practice, the provision of services without a contract is a common occurrence.

According to Article No. 435 of the civil legislation, a written proposal to conclude a contract, depending on the content of the document, may be recognized as an application from the customer institution or an invoice for payment for services issued by the contractor. This requires that the paper reflect the subject of the contract by referring to the services provided by the contractor. Of course, given the nature of the transaction, both parties have the right to determine the period within which all necessary services must be provided.

Invoice and invoice as a contract

Is it possible to limit ourselves to documents that act as an offer? If the goods are transferred according to invoices and accepted by the buyer without objection, this may indicate an agreement between the seller and the buyer on the terms of the contract and the conclusion of the supply contract.

Courts qualify such a shipment of goods as a one-time purchase and sale transaction if the invoice contains information about the name, quantity and nomenclature of the goods.

It is important to confirm the fact of delivery of the goods with an invoice signed by the buyer’s representative, even better if there is an original power of attorney, the details of which are recorded in the invoice.

An agreement can also be concluded when the seller issues an invoice for payment, which lists the essential terms of the supply and payment agreement. The invoice may contain terms about payment within a certain time. Until the invoice has been paid, the contract is not considered concluded.

It can be concluded that if all the essential terms of the supply agreement are included in the invoice and invoice, the relationship of the parties is considered to have completed a purchase and sale transaction.

What is acceptance?

Accordingly, acceptance under this offer will be considered either the issuance of an invoice from the contractor in response to the customer’s request, or the fact of payment for services based on the issued receipt. In such situations, an agreement for the provision of paid services may be considered concluded immediately from the moment the customer receives an invoice for payment in accordance with the application. The moment of transfer of funds as part of payment for services can also be considered a fact of conclusion.

What does the actual provision of services without a contract entail?

Actual contractual relations

Obligations can arise not only from a contract or as a result of causing harm, but also from other grounds specified in the Civil Code of the Russian Federation (subclause 8, clause 1, article 8, clause 2, article 307 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation), and actual contractual relations are like times and there is a basis for the emergence of obligations.

It is possible to raise the question of the non-conclusion of a contract due to inconsistency of essential terms only before the start of execution, since inconsistency entails the impossibility of execution. An actually executed contract cannot be considered unconcluded.

The subject of the agreement is determined precisely so that there is no uncertainty in the relationship, and if the agreement is executed, then there is no uncertainty (see, for example, Resolution of the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of Russia dated 02/08/11 No. 13970/10).

Approval of a contract or the commencement of execution of a contract, as well as counter-execution, may indicate the existence of an actual contractual relationship. The commencement of execution of the contract is confirmed, in particular, by the signing of:

• acceptance certificates;
• shipping documents;
• powers of attorney to receive goods;
• payment documents, etc.

In relation to rent: if the agreement does not clearly indicate the thing being rented, but in fact it was transferred to the tenant, and there was no dispute about the fulfillment of the obligation to transfer the object, then there is no reason to challenge this agreement on the grounds of uncertainty of the leased object (clause 15 of the resolution Plenum of the Supreme Arbitration Court of Russia dated November 17, 2011 No. 73).

In relation to a contract: if, before accepting the results of the work, no disputes arose regarding the absence of essential conditions in it, then there is every reason to believe that an actual contractual relationship has developed between the parties.

Unseen circumstances

No one can be completely immune from the occurrence of circumstances that prevent the provision of a service. Something like this can happen not only due to the fault of the customer, but also due to the contractor. It is also possible that a situation may arise in which neither party will be able to answer for the circumstances.

Consequences

As a rule, the consequences of such circumstances directly depend on whether the application, along with the invoice for payment issued by the contractor, together determines that an agreement was actually concluded between these parties.

If such a fact is established, the consequences will be the same as those that may occur in the presence of an agreement drawn up in the form of a single document signed by both parties:

• As part of the performance of actions by the contractor that were aimed at providing services, and in addition, if the result is not used by the customer, the entire payment amount is not refundable. This is clearly stated in Article No. 781 of the civil legislation.
• In situations where the customer unilaterally refuses the agreement before all the required services are provided in the proper form, all expenses actually incurred by him must be fully reimbursed in favor of the contractor. Providing educational services without a contract or tutoring also implies this. Consequences may arise if the inability to provide services is due to circumstances for which neither party is responsible.
• In the event that the services are not provided in a timely manner due to the fault of the contractor, the customer has the right to withdraw from the agreement, demanding full compensation for losses. In particular, he may demand the return of money paid for the provision of services.

In situations where, before the actual provision of services and their acceptance, the documents exchanged by the parties along with the actions already performed by them do not make it possible to establish that an agreement was concluded between the persons for the provision of paid services (transport, for example), it is required to recognize that the citizens never had any obligations under the transaction. In this case, submitted applications, issued invoices along with the transfer of funds, and so on should be considered proof of the transaction. The provision of legal services without a contract is also often carried out.

Do not enter into an agreement with a regional operator. Is this possible?

ARBITRATION COURT OF THE CENTRAL DISTRICT

RESOLUTION

dated October 28, 2021 in case No. A36-254/2019

The operative part of the resolution was announced on October 23, 2019

The resolution was made in full on 10/28/2019

Arbitration Court of the Central District consisting of:

presiding Egorova S.G.

judges Elagina O.K., Kozelkin I.I.

when participating in a court hearing:

from the plaintiff - LLC "Clean City" Sorokin D.V. (ext. No. 12 dated June 25, 2019);

from the defendant - IP Bodakin S.E. Khamkhoev R.Yu. (ext. No. 2 dated March 19, 2019); Bodakin M.S. (ext. from 08/22/2019);

having considered in open court the cassation appeal of individual entrepreneur Sergei Evgenievich Bodakin against the decision of the Arbitration Court of the Lipetsk Region dated 05/31/2019 and the decision of the Nineteenth Arbitration Court of Appeal dated 07/30/2019 in case No. A36-254/2019,

installed:

Limited Liability Company "Clean City" (hereinafter referred to as the plaintiff, LLC "Clean City", OGRN 1064802000889, INN 4802009478) filed a claim with the Arbitration Court of the Lipetsk Region against individual entrepreneur Sergei Evgenievich Bodakin (hereinafter referred to as the defendant, IP Bodakin S.E. ., OGRNIP 308480205000046, INN 480200227963) to collect the amount of debt for payment for services for the management of solid municipal waste in the amount of 58,678 rubles. 72 kopecks (including VAT) for the period July, August, September, October 2018 (taking into account the clarification of the claims in accordance with Article 49 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation - hereinafter referred to as the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation).

By the decision of the Arbitration Court of the Lipetsk Region dated May 31, 2019, the claims were satisfied in full.

By the resolution of the Nineteenth Arbitration Court of Appeal dated July 30, 2019, the decision of the Lipetsk Region Arbitration Court dated May 31, 2019 was left unchanged.

Having disagreed with the adopted judicial acts, citing the discrepancy between the court's conclusions and the actual circumstances of the case and the evidence available in the case, the Department of Property and Land Relations of the Bryansk City Administration appealed to the Arbitration Court of the Central District with a cassation appeal, in which it asks to cancel the decision of the Arbitration Court of the Bryansk Region dated August 21 .2018 and the decision of the Twentieth Arbitration Court of Appeal dated April 16, 2019 and send the case for a new trial to the court of first instance.

To support the arguments of the complaint, the cassator refers to the fact that the agreement with the plaintiff was not concluded; believes that the plaintiff used the wrong area of ​​the property in his calculations; draws the court's attention to the fact that it is currently challenging the standard applied in the calculations.

The representative of the defendant at the court hearing of the cassation court supported the arguments of the cassation appeal for the reasons set out in it.

The plaintiff's representatives objected to the arguments of the cassation appeal on the grounds set out in the response.

Having checked, in the manner established by Chapter 35 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, the correctness of the courts’ application of the rules of substantive and procedural law, the compliance of the courts’ conclusions on the application of the rules of law with the circumstances established in the case and the evidence available in the case, based on the arguments of the cassation appeal and objections to it, taking into account the explanations of the representatives parties, the cassation court does not find grounds to satisfy the complaint, due to the following.

As follows from the case materials and established by the courts, between Chisty Gorod LLC (regional operator) and IP Bodakin S.E. (consumer) a public agreement has been concluded for the provision of services for the management of municipal solid waste, under the terms of which the regional operator undertakes to accept municipal solid waste (abbreviated as MSW) in the volume and place specified in this agreement and ensure its collection, transportation, processing, disinfection, burial in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation, and the consumer undertakes to pay for the services of the regional operator at a price determined within the duly approved uniform tariff for the services of the regional operator. The start date for the provision of municipal solid waste management services is July 1, 2021.

The contract for the provision of services for the management of municipal solid waste was published by Chisty Gorod LLC in the Official Department of the Gryazinskie Izvestia newspaper No. 59 dated May 29, 2018.

In accordance with Article 435 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation (hereinafter referred to as the Civil Code of the Russian Federation), an offer is recognized as an offer addressed to a person, which is sufficiently defined and expresses the intention of the person who made the offer to consider himself to have entered into an agreement with the addressee who will accept the offer. In this case, the offer must contain the essential terms of the contract.

According to paragraph 3 of Article 438 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the performance by the person who received the offer, within the period established for its acceptance, of actions to fulfill the terms of the contract specified in it (shipment or acceptance of goods, provision of services, etc.) is considered acceptance.

Taking into account the provisions of Part 2 of Article 437 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the publication of an agreement for the provision of services for the management of municipal solid waste is a public offer.

In accordance with paragraph. 3, 4 clause 8(17) of the Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of November 12, 2016 N 1156 “On the management of municipal solid waste and amendments to the Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of August 25, 2008 N 641” (together with the “Rules for the management of municipal solid waste ") the consumer, within 15 working days from the date the regional operator places a proposal to conclude an agreement for the provision of services for the management of solid municipal waste, sends the consumer's application and documents to the regional operator in accordance with paragraphs 8(5) - 8(7) of these Rules. The consumer's application is considered in the manner provided for in paragraphs 8(8) - 8(16) of these Rules. If the consumer has not sent the consumer's application and documents to the regional operator in accordance with paragraphs 8(5) - 8(7) of these Rules within the specified period, the contract for the provision of services for the management of solid municipal waste is considered to be concluded on the terms of a standard contract and entered into into force on the 16th working day after the regional operator places a proposal to conclude the said agreement on its official website on the Internet information and telecommunications network.

As correctly established by the courts, an agreement for the provision of services for the management of municipal solid waste No. 136 dated June 28, 2018 for retail facilities where he carries out business activities was sent to the defendant, but a signed version of the agreement, or a reasoned refusal to sign, was addressed to LLC " Clean City” were not received within the deadlines established by law.

Since IP Bodakin S.E. the consumer’s application and documents in accordance with paragraphs 8(5) - 8(7) of these Rules were not sent to the regional operator, therefore, the agreement is considered to be concluded on the terms of a standard agreement and comes into force on the 16th working day after its official placement and publication.

Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated 06/03/2016 N 505 “On approval of the Rules for commercial accounting of the volume and (or) mass of solid municipal waste” approved the Rules establishing the procedure for commercial accounting of the volume and (or) mass of solid municipal waste using measuring instruments that comply with legal requirements of the Russian Federation on ensuring the uniformity of measurements, or by calculation method for the purpose of making payments under contracts in the field of municipal solid waste management (hereinafter referred to as the Rules).

According to clause 5 of the Rules, commercial accounting of municipal solid waste is carried out: a) by calculation based on the standards for the accumulation of municipal solid waste, expressed in quantitative terms of volume; the number and volume of containers for the accumulation of municipal solid waste installed in places where municipal solid waste is accumulated; b) based on the mass of municipal solid waste determined using measuring instruments.

In order to make settlements with owners of municipal solid waste, commercial accounting of municipal solid waste is carried out in accordance with subparagraph “a” of paragraph 5 of these Rules (clause 6 of the Rules).

From the plaintiff’s explanations it follows that accounting by calculation, based on the number and volume of containers for the accumulation of solid municipal waste installed in places where solid municipal waste is accumulated, cannot be applied due to the lack of container sites in the trading areas agreed upon with the Local Government Authority and the Regional Operator defendant's objects.

Accounting by calculation based on the mass of municipal solid waste, determined using measuring instruments, is used in relationships with municipal solid waste management operators who own, by right of ownership or on another legal basis, facilities for the processing, neutralization and (or) disposal of municipal solid waste and transported from such facilities (clause 9 of the Rules).

Thus, in relation to the defendant’s retail facilities, commercial accounting of municipal solid waste can only be carried out by calculation based on the standards for the accumulation of municipal solid waste, expressed in quantitative terms of volume.

Order of the Department of Housing and Communal Services of the Lipetsk Region dated 02/09/2017 N 01-03/16 approved the standards for the accumulation of municipal solid waste in the Lipetsk region.

By virtue of clause 33 of the said Order, the standards for the accumulation of solid municipal waste for department store stores in the Lipetsk region are: 1.56 cubic meters. m per 1 sq. m of total area.

According to information from the Unified State Register of Rights to Real Estate and Transactions with It, Individual Entrepreneur Bodakin S.E. is the owner of 1/2 share of non-residential premises at the address: Lipetsk region, Gryazinsky district, Gryazi, st. Oktyabrskaya, 51, total area of ​​the premises is 299 sq. m. m.

04/08/2019, as part of a commission represented by representatives of Clean City LLC and the deputy head of the municipal services department of the Administration of the city of Gryazi, T.Yu. Moiseeva. An inspection report was drawn up for the waste generation facility at the address: Store "Stroydom", Gryazi, st. 10 February, no. 58.

Based on the results of the survey, it was established that the store sells industrial goods; the approximate usable area of ​​the store is 50 square meters. m, in the consumer's corner inside the store the information of individual entrepreneur S.E. Bodakin is indicated, the same information is indicated in the fire evacuation plan, and behind the store there is an iron hangar with an area of ​​at least 200 sq. m. m.

IP Bodakin S.E. asked the court to exclude the said survey report from evidence in the case, since it was drawn up in his absence.

The courts rightfully refused to exclude this document from evidence in the case, since the defendant claimed that it was falsified on the basis of Art. 161 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation did not declare.

As the plaintiff indicated, IP Bodakin S.E. Carrying out entrepreneurial activities in the retail trade of other household products at retail facilities owned by him, he did not fulfill the obligation to pay for services for the management of solid municipal waste.

The fact of provision of services for the management of solid municipal waste (collection, transportation, processing, disposal, neutralization, disposal of solid municipal waste) by a regional operator to the defendant in July - October 2021 in the amount of 117,072 cubic meters. m/month, in the amount of 58,698 rubles. 72 kopecks, confirmed by order No. 27 of 06/07/2018 available in the case materials “On approval of the Schedule for the removal of solid municipal waste from container sites located on the territory of the urban settlement of the city of Gryazi, Gryazinsky municipal district, Lipetsk region”, a printout of the GLONASS satellite navigation system from garbage trucks LLC "Clean City", invoice for payment No. 136/1797 dated 06.11.2018.

Thus, having assessed the evidence available in the case materials in its totality and relationship according to the rules of Art. 71 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, the courts reasonably satisfied the plaintiff’s demands to collect from the defendant the debt for payment for services for the management of solid municipal waste in the amount of 58,678 rubles. 72 kopecks for the period July, August, September and October 2021, since the plaintiff has proven the fact of providing services for the management of solid municipal waste (collection, transportation, processing, disposal, neutralization, burial of solid municipal waste) during the disputed period, as well as their volume and cost .

Rejecting the arguments of IP Bodakin S.E. that an agreement was concluded between him and JSC EcoProm-Lipetsk for services for the processing and disposal of solid municipal waste (excluding large-sized ones), which, in his opinion, confirms the fictitiousness of the agreement with LLC Clean City, the courts reasonably proceeded from the fact that the validity period of the agreement concluded between individual entrepreneur S.E. Bodakin and JSC EcoProm-Lipetsk, determined from 01/01/2018 to 06/30/2018, while the plaintiff asks to collect the debt for a different period: from July to October 2021. The defendant did not provide evidence in the case file that during the period specified by the plaintiff, services for the treatment and disposal of solid municipal waste were provided by another operator (Article 9, 65 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation).

In addition, the defendant’s argument that the contract with the plaintiff has not been concluded is not legal, since the defendant is obliged to pay for the disposal of waste from its business activities.

The defendant’s arguments that he does not produce waste in the declared quantity, does not actually use the plaintiff’s services, that there is no agreement with the plaintiff, contradict the above rules of law and the factual circumstances established by the courts of two instances based on the materials of this case.

In the cassation appeal, the defendant challenges the standard that was used by the plaintiff in calculating and determining the volume of waste for retail facilities owned by the defendant. This argument is subject to rejection by the district court of cassation, since the defendant did not provide evidence in the case file that the standards used by the plaintiff were invalid.

Thus, on the territory of the Lipetsk region there are standards for the accumulation of solid municipal waste, approved by Order of the Office of Housing and Communal Services of the Lipetsk Region dated 02/09/2017 N 01-03/16 (vol. 1, pp. 77-79).

The defendant's argument that the plaintiff accepted the wrong area of ​​real estate in the calculations was not rightfully taken into account by the courts of two instances, since the burden of proving a different area used by individual entrepreneur S.E. Bodakin in trading activities, which is recorded in the commission act, lies precisely with him, however, the defendant, in violation of Art. Art. 9, 65 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, no title documents have been submitted for the disputed object: the Stroydom Store, Gryazi, st. 10 February, no. 58, confirming the different area of ​​this object.

The defendant’s argument about the plaintiff’s failure to comply with the claim procedure contradicts the case materials, since the plaintiff sent claim No. 93/yu dated November 12, 2018 to the defendant, received by the defendant on November 15, 2018 (vol. 1, pp. 73-75). Moreover, in the cassation court, this argument cannot serve as a basis for canceling the judicial acts that have entered into force, since the defendant did not express any intention to resolve the dispute peacefully during the dispute resolution process, and in the district court, the representative of the cassator confirmed that he does not see the possibility of settling the dispute amicably agreement.

The defendant’s reference to information on the processing, disposal, neutralization, transportation and disposal of production and consumption waste for 2021 was rightfully rejected by the courts as based on assumptions, without taking into account the actual circumstances of the case.

In the case under consideration, on the basis of paragraph 5 of the “Rules for commercial accounting of the volume and (or) mass of solid municipal waste”, approved. By Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated 06/03/2016 N 505, in relation to the defendant’s retail facilities, commercial accounting of municipal solid waste must be carried out by calculation based on the standards for the accumulation of municipal solid waste, expressed in quantitative terms of volume.

Thus, the cassation appeal does not contain convincing arguments based on evidence that would allow one to cancel or change the contested judicial acts.

By virtue of the provisions of Part 1 of Article 288 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, the arbitration court of cassation checks the validity of the appealed judicial acts only to the extent necessary to verify the compliance of the act under review with the norms of substantive and procedural law, based on the limits of consideration of the case in arbitration established by Article 286 of the said Code court of cassation.

In accordance with the provisions of Art. 286, part 2 art. 287 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, the cassation court is not given the authority to review the factual circumstances of the case established by the courts during their consideration, to give a different assessment of the evidence collected in the case, to establish or consider as proven circumstances that were not established in the decision or resolution or were rejected by the court of first or appellate instance .

Taking into account that all the circumstances that are significant for the resolution of the dispute were the subject of consideration by arbitration courts of two instances, they were given a proper legal assessment, no violations of the norms of procedural law were identified when adopting the appealed judicial act, the cassation court finds no grounds for their cancellation .

Guided by paragraph 1 of part 1 of Article 287, Article 289 of the Arbitration Procedural Code of the Russian Federation, the Arbitration Court of the Central District

decided:

the decision of the Arbitration Court of the Lipetsk Region dated 05/31/2019 and the decision of the Nineteenth Arbitration Court of Appeal dated 07/30/2019 in case No. A36-254/2019 are left unchanged, and the cassation appeal is not satisfied.

The resolution comes into force from the date of its adoption and can be appealed to the Judicial Collegium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation within a period not exceeding two months from the date of its adoption, in the manner prescribed by Articles 291.1 - 291.2 of the Arbitration Procedural Code of the Russian Federation.

Request for refund

In such situations, the customer has the right, at any time convenient for him, to demand the return of paid funds, which can be regarded as unjust enrichment. In this case, the contractor does not have any obligations related to the provision of services for the customer. The institution can directly assess the appropriateness of the methods of document preparation on its own.

The likely consequences of providing services without a contract can be minimized if in the documentation exchanged between the parties, especially in the customer’s application or invoice for payment, the services are specified sufficiently so that the actual subject of the contract, along with the term, can be considered agreed upon by both parties.