The applicant of the complaint did not participate in the public procurement – the cassation did not collect the costs of its preparation
The inspectors complained that the customer had violated Law No. 44-FL. The applicant's complaint was found to be justified. To prepare it, he signed a contract for legal services and demanded that the customer reimburse these costs.
The appeal and cassation were refused:
The applicant did not participate in either the initial purchase or the repeat purchase. This means that he had no interest in signing a contract. He often appeals against the actions of other customers in purchases in which he is not involved, and appeals to the courts with similar claims;
You can claim damages when your rights are violated. In this case, the disputed expenses are not related to the restoration of the violated right. The actions of the customer did not affect the applicant's business activities. There is no connection between them and expenses;
No special identification is needed to file a complaint with the supervisory authority. On the website of the Federal Antimonopoly Service, including the procedure for filing a complaint, requirements for its content, which eliminates the need to seek legal assistance.
It should be noted that the Arbitration Court of the Far Eastern District, under similar circumstances, collected disputed expenses from the customer, but in a smaller amount.
The photo is taken from https://ru .freepik.com/popular-photos.