The seller, who lost the goods, refused to claim Ozon for 1 million rubles in the Supreme Court

IP of Elektostal Stanislav Beetle demanded Ozon since March 2023. In the demand, he demanded 1 million rubles on the market, particularly 321 thousand rubles for lost goods, 484 thousand rubles, for another 154 thousand for the preparation of an unexplored product For performance. The businessman announced 50 thousand rubles to pay the services of a representative in the Court.

According to the MoneyPlace system, Zhuk entrepreneur sells a wide range of laces in the markets. His assets, as follows of the case file, disappeared in a warehouse in the new Riga in the stages. In June 2022, the businessman decided to get 3388 units from the warehouse, but actually received 1731 pieces. On August 1, 2022, the beetle sent Ozon an act of discrepancy for 1331 things. Two days later, on August 3, a fire occurred in the same warehouse. At the time of fire, the rest of the beetle was 2646 pieces, of which 864 units were recognized by him burned and subject to compensation. The beetle sent a claim to Ozon, but remained without satisfaction. Then, the businessman filed a lawsuit in court.

The Moscow Arbitration Court, as well as the courts of two more instances, calculated the sewler requirements that had lost on the weight of the products. Its demand was only partially met, the amount of payments was reduced by 10 times, 100,000 rubles. The courts were sent to the agreement concluded between the market and the seller prescribed in it the “formula for compensation” and the “Commission and Ozon tariffs” on the market website and tariffs. Beetle believed that Civil Code rules should be applied to it.

“Taking into account the” compensation formula “(contractual losses) under paragraph 5.2 of Appendix No. 1 to the contract (For vendors on the Ozon platform in 2021. – approx. RB.ru) The amount of compensation for the value of the assets burned in a fire is 7449 rubles, compensation for the value of the goods under the law of the lack of August 4, 2022 is 11459 Rublos, a total of 18908 rubles “, the First Court said the instance.

The beetle decided to go to the end and sent an appeal of cassation to the Supreme Court. In it, he referred to the violation of the substantive law by the courts. In his opinion, the size of the losses, including the real ones, must be done on the basis of the provisions of art. 15 of the Civil Code in relation to the loss of goods due to the fault of the accused, and not under an agreement with the market. In December, the Judge of the Supreme Court admitted that the arguments of the beetle deserved attention and transferred their complaint to the hearing scheduled for January 21.

“Achieving the consideration of the case in the aircraft is not an easy task, since the vast majority of complaints deviate. To consider the complaint, it is necessary not only to argue its position correctly, but also demonstrate that substantial violations of the law were committed in the lower courts. The very fact of considering a complaint of an individual entrepreneur of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation may indicate that the dispute affects not only private interests, but also the broader regulation problems, “said RB.RU The lawyer I-Legal Poly Gavryushina.

But the merits were not considered. As follows the materials of the Supreme Court, before the consideration of the claimant’s case, a request was received to remember the appeal. As a result, the Judicial Board left it without taking into account.

RB.RU sent an application to Ozon and Stanislav Zhuku. At the time of publication, I did not receive answers.

The opinion of the lawyers

The lawyers surveyed by RB.RU believe that the parties could agree before the court, not to create a judicial precedent in favor of sales sellers.

As explained RB.ru Principal partner, Chief of Forensic Arbitration of Ab Moscow “Sokolov, Trusov and Partners” Andrei SokolovThe review of the appeal of cassation is the right of the person who filed this complaint. In this case, the Cassation Court leaves a complaint without taking into account, if this does not contradict the law and does not violate the legitimate rights and interests of others.

“In general, the review of the appeal of cassation occurs when the parties reached the agreement on the agreement of the conflict in one way or another (a conciliation agreement, a media agreement). The conditions of such agreements are generally not revealed. The most interested in markets not to create precedents for similar disputes, ”said Sokolov.

The lawyer I-Legal Poly Gavryushina He confirms that the positive decision of the Supreme Court in the Zhuk case against Ozon could become an important precedent to regulate relations between markets and vendors. However, the appeal of cassation was removed before considering the case on merits.

“This leaves important questions without response, including the legitimacy of the methodology to calculate the compensation of the lost product that Ozon uses,” says the lawyer.

According to Gavryushina, the review of the complaint may be associated with several reasons. For example, the parties could allow the dispute outside the test frame.

Gavryushina states that, in the absence of decisions of the Supreme Court on such disagreements, sellers in the markets must remember the key points that can affect the result of the disputes associated with the loss or damage to the goods.

• For the successful resolution of the disputes, sellers need, in the first place, to document the fact of transferring goods to the market. This can be done with the help of acceptance transfer acts, invoices or records in the personal account of the platform. If the transmission is confirmed, the courts often take the singer’s side, especially if the loss of goods occurred due to the market failure.
• Second, it is important to justify the amount of damage by providing calculations and documents that confirm the cost of goods. The courts verify the methodology of calculating compensation for the fulfillment of the contract and the legislation. In this case, the courts agreed with Ozon’s calculations, which emphasizes the importance of the careful study of the contract before starting cooperation with the market.
• If the goods were lost or broken and a dispute arose with the market, sellers must be carefully prepared for the trial, collecting all the necessary evidence and consulting with lawyers.