Courts reminded how to be the participant who allowed violations in the second parts at the same time three applications
The organization has applied for three auctions. They were rejected because the credentials of the person acting on behalf of the participant were not confirmed. According to the third application, the site transferred to the customer the funds contributed as collateral.
The participant appealed to the court to recover the amount of security from the operator, the Law n 44-FZ implies systematic violations, but in this case it was not possible to eliminate them. The courts did not support the participant, finding that not all applications were filed on the same day.
The Supreme court upheld the acts, noting that the operator of the site is responsible for the technical part of the auction and can not assess the violations committed by the participant. The money is transferred to the customer, so you can not demand them from the operator.
We will remind, since July 1, 2018, the operator reports systematic violations to the Bank, and that in 30 days transfers money to the budget. We believe that it is also pointless to demand their return to the Bank. It is necessary to address the claim to the chief Manager of means of the budget.
Document: Definition of the Supreme Court of 21.01.2019 in the case N A40-191025/2017