Recovery of almost 700 thousand UAH in damages from a supplier of low-quality industrial equipment: another victory for WinnerLex attorneys in court

Recovery of debts or damages from counterparties are very common types of business disputes that we have to deal with.

Our regular client, an industrial enterprise from the Kyiv region, contacted WINNERLEX with a request to help resolve a dispute with the equipment supplier.

During operation of the supplied equipment, it began to break down, but despite the repairs, it finally failed and was completely unsuitable for use. For some reason, the supplier decided to ignore our client’s request to replace the low-quality equipment or refund its cost. He claimed that the defects identified were a consequence of the buyer’s violation of the equipment operating requirements, but refused to send his specialists to conduct a joint inspection.

The lawyers of WINNERLEX carefully studied the situation and supported the case from the stage of legally correct documentation and recording of all deficiencies, including the creation of a relevant commission, correspondence with the seller in order to prepare the ground and evidence base for going to court. A comprehensive pre-trial expertise of the equipment was also organized with the involvement of specialists from scientific institutes in Kyiv and Kharkov. The expertise confirmed the presence of defects in the metal of the supplied equipment, which were the cause of its destruction.

After receiving the expert opinion, a claim was filed to the Economic Court of Dnipropetrovsk Region demanding compensation for the cost of the equipment, as well as damage caused by the repair and expertise.

The supplier tried to question the experts’ conclusions in court, referring to the allegedly provision of another equipment for the experts’ examination that was not supplied by the seller, and also that the experts had chosen the wrong research methodology. According to the supplier of the defective equipment, the “unconditional” proof of its “proper quality” was the certificate for it, sent to the buyer along with the equipment, and if it then began to fall apart during operation, then it was not it, but another one.

The lawyers of WINNERLEX, in turn, prepared and submitted explanations to the court, which thoroughly substantiated the invalidity of the defendant’s objections.

Having considered the arguments of the parties, the court of first instance decided to fully grant the claim and recover the damages incurred by our client due to the low-quality equipment. The result was confirmed in the appellate court – the supplier’s appeal was rejected, the court’s decision in favor of our client was left as before.

Also, the costs of our services were reimbursed from the defendant by the courts in favor of our client, which is always nice.

This case is a good example of how a client’s timely contact a lawyer is the key to the possibility of forming a legal model of the client’s behavior in a controversial situation, preparing a good evidence base and winning a difficult case in court.