Third parties have settled in the “Safe City”
[ad_1]
Third parties have appeared in the legal dispute between the Ministry of Emergency Situations and the National Center for Informatization of Rostec, which is responsible for the development of the Safe City hardware and software complex. These are contractors whom the center attracted during the work, including the structures of Rostelecom and Rostec. Litigation has already led to difficulties in implementing the “Safe City”; lawyers admit that the involvement of third parties can facilitate the collection of evidence in the case.
The Moscow Arbitration Court granted the petition of National Center of Informatization LLC (NCI; part of Rostec) to involve third parties in the case of the fifth stage of research and development work (R&D) within the framework of the creation of the Safe City agro-industrial complex, it follows from the determination of February 20. We are talking about a trial between the NCI, which carried out R&D, and the Ministry of Emergency Situations, where they refused to pay for the fifth, final stage of work worth 45.5 million rubles. LLC Korklass (a structure of Rostelecom), JSC OPK (part of Rostec) and JSC Compass are involved as third parties. The NCI clarified to Kommersant that the companies acted as co-executors under the R&D contract. The next meeting is scheduled for April 23. Rostec believes that R&D was carried out “in good faith, in full and on time.” Rostelecom declined to comment; the Ministry of Emergency Situations and JSC Compass did not respond.
The court satisfied the claim of NCI, obliging the Ministry of Emergency Situations to pay 45.5 million rubles in June 2023. The funds were written off from the ministry’s accounts, but it appealed to the cassation court, and the court sent the case for a new trial, ordering an examination. According to the decision dated February 20, the Ministry of Emergency Situations’ petition for the return of 45.5 million rubles. the court left without consideration.
The fifth stage of R&D was completed in 2022, the work included the preparation of a regulatory framework for the operation of the agricultural sector throughout the country. The Ministry of Emergency Situations accepted and paid for all the first stages of work, they say in the NCI. The first official comments on the fifth stage were received only before the cassation meeting, in December 2023. The document contained 33 comments with which the NCI did not agree (see Kommersant of February 20).
As noted in the NCI, due to the proceedings, the regions cannot begin the full implementation of the agricultural complex. In June 2022, the Ministry of Emergency Situations planned to request 15 billion rubles. from the budget for pilot projects in the Krasnodar Territory, Crimea, Sevastopol, Voronezh and Belgorod regions (see “Kommersant” dated June 20, 2022). The deployment of the “Safe City” agro-industrial complex in border regions was stipulated by the government’s instructions following a meeting in July 2022, the NCI clarified. “In addition to the financial component and the change of leadership of the Ministry of Emergency Situations, one of the obstacles was the lack of clear algorithms for interdepartmental interaction,” NCI General Director Konstantin Solodukhin explained to Kommersant. They were planned to be developed as part of R&D. Accordingly, the regions cannot fully begin to fulfill the instructions, he emphasized.
Involving contractors with third parties “will eliminate the possibility of challenging court decisions affecting their rights,” on a procedural basis – due to non-participation in the case, explains Polina Pavlova, partner at the Grishin, Pavlova and Partners law group. She notes that the cassation sent the case for a new consideration, pointing out the need for an examination and a more complete study of the factual circumstances. Contractors, the lawyer believes, “may have the necessary information and documents.” Partner at the Smolenka 33 Bar Association, Elena Mende, says that “one of the contractors may be able to provide explanations useful for asking questions to the expert and assessing his conclusion.” “In addition, if it is determined that the plaintiff did not perform or improperly performed a government contract, this could lead to claims against the contractors. They need the opportunity to have their say on the work,” explains Ms. Mende. Both lawyers believe that the involvement of contractors will “facilitate the collection of evidence in the case.”
[ad_2]
Source link
