The Arbitration Court of the Tula Region suspended the operation of the brewery-restaurant due to a discrepancy in the address listed in the long-term lease agreement and the extract from the USRN. The production will not be able to operate within the framework of the provisional measures initiated by Rosalkogoltabakkontrol to exclude it from the register for the same infringement.

The court suspended the operation of the Petr Petrovich restaurant-brewery due to incorrect address

Subscribe to RB.RU on Telegram

The absence of a long-term lease agreement for the premises used was the reason for the suspension of work on the OOO Petr Petrovich brewery-restaurant in Tula. The operation of the brewery was suspended by the decision of the Arbitration Court of the Tula region.

Rosalkogoltabakcontrol (RATK) filed a lawsuit to exclude the brewery from the register of producers due to the lack of a lease agreement for the premises where production was directly carried out. The company provided an agreement valid until 2032, concluded with individual entrepreneur V. Yu Vinogradov for premises with an area of ​​153 square meters. m. The agreement was registered with Rosreestr, but the address on it did not match the address on the extract from the Unified State Register of Real Estate, according to court documents.

In the lease agreement the address was indicated as Tula, Pervomaiskaya, 13a, building 15, and in the extract: Tula, Central Park of Culture and Culture. The reason for the discrepancies was not specified in court. Through the phone number listed on the brewery’s website, RB.RU declined to comment on the suspension of work. The trial is scheduled to continue on July 1.

“EGRN data does not confirm the presence of Peter Petrovich LLC in ownership, economic management, operational management or leasing, the period of which is determined by the agreement and is one year or more, production and warehouse premises, which are real estate objects. at the address: Pervomaiskaya, bldg. 13a, building 15,” says the court decision.

RATC demanded to suspend the production of alcoholic beverages at the brewery until the judicial act comes into force in case of exclusion from the register.

The service aims to remove about thirty brewers from the register due to the lack of long-term lease contracts for premises and technological equipment. The work of some of them was suspended as a provisional measure.

As reported by RB.RU Head of the press service of RATC Alexander Kulikov, Violations of registration requirements were identified during on-site assessments.

All services and companies related to moving on a single map

“The main violations of mandatory requirements identified during on-site assessments carried out by Rosalkogoltabakkontrol specialists are the lack of ownership of the organization or long-term lease of production facilities or technological equipment,” said Alexander Kulikov.

Previously, the Arbitration Court of the Rostov region suspended the operation of the Yuzhny Pivovar brewery in Novocherkassk. Court documents indicate that the reason for the introduction of provisional measures was claims against the main equipment that was not allocated when calculating the production capacity and therefore the calculation of the equipment capacity exceeded 300 thousand deciliters. After the publication of the RB.RU material, the court reviewed its decision and annulled the provisional measures. Court documents indicate that provisional measures were taken before the company was included in the register, specifically on May 29.

“In these circumstances, the court considers that the precautionary measures adopted by ruling of May 24, 2024 do not serve the aforementioned purpose, the reasons to maintain the precautionary measures have disappeared, so the precautionary measures are subject to cancellation,” , say the court materials.

Vice President of the Federation of Restaurateurs and Hoteliers of Russia Alexey Nebolsin declared to RB.RU that RATC first carries out inspections to “clean” non-working companies from the register, which is absolutely correct. In fact, some brewers have not worked for a long time and under their auspices “it is not clear who” can produce beer.

Nebolsin adds that when brewers who do not have their own locations begin to be removed from the market, the industry will lose its original companies. There are already precedents that, due to problems with the premises, attempts are made to remove companies from the registry, but until now “they try to solve the problems in their own way.”

“And this question will arise sooner or later. We will categorically support the brewers on this issue,” promised the FRiO vice president.

Author:

Ekaterina Strukova

Source: RB

Previous article5 Pixar Movies Worth Watching If You Like Inside Out
Next articleGoogle hasn’t fixed its AI: still recommends adding glue to pizzaScience and technology15:08 | June 12, 2024
I am a professional journalist and content creator with extensive experience writing for news websites. I currently work as an author at Gadget Onus, where I specialize in covering hot news topics. My written pieces have been published on some of the biggest media outlets around the world, including The Guardian and BBC News.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here