Dispute over the recovery of 19,000,000 rubles in damages

The client is the owner of the transport infrastructure (bus station) and is legally obligated to enter into service contracts with carriers. The bus station submitted a general service contract, which is concluded with all carriers without exception, to one of the carriers for execution.
The carrier sent a protocol of disagreements demanding that the contract be concluded on its terms.

Since the bus station refused to conclude the contract, the carrier filed a lawsuit demanding that the contract be concluded on its terms. Following the review, the carrier's claim was denied, specifically due to the fact that it had become bankrupt and had lost its individual entrepreneur status and transportation license.
In its claim for damages, the carrier stated that for over a year the bus station had evaded concluding the contract, which meant it could not carry out transportation and therefore suffered losses in the form of lost profits.

 Usconsult specialists built the bus station's defense on the following positions:
• The carrier could have entered into the contract and operated under it. Failure to accept the carrier's revision does not constitute evasion of the contract;
• A previously signed public contract may be amended by court order, which the carrier failed to take advantage of;

Additionally, the representatives collected evidence, found proof that the carrier had been sending buses even without a bus station, determined the exact number of departures, and located the website where bus tickets were posted. Screenshots of each day when buses were sold
were submitted to the court.
A coherent position allowed the court to confirm the absence of violations on the part of the bus station, thereby protecting the property interests of the Principal.