The Municipal Public Institution "Capital Construction Administration of the Municipal Formation" Makarovsky Urban District "of the Sakhalin Oblast concluded a municipal contract with Avrora JSC for the construction of a socially significant facility for the Sakhalin Oblast - an ice sports complex in the city of Makarov. The contract price according to the estimate documentation developed by Sibgrad Ltd. amounted to 89 million rubles.
After the signing of the contract by the Ministry of Transport and the administration of the Makarovsky urban district, it was decided to adjust the project documentation, increasing the areas, seats, installation of additional locker rooms. This led to a delay in starting work for 2.5 months. In addition, the grounds for adjusting the estimate for this object was the obvious error revealed by Aurora CJSC in the project documentation posted at the auction: there were no costs for the installation and maintenance of the ice field at the estimated cost. The customer excluded the ice from the estimated cost of the ice rink, considering that there would be enough for one structure "The airy indoor skating rink in Makarov" for riding on the bare rubble inside the building. Also, the estimate did not take into account the replacement of the ground due to its unsuitable for placing the object in the allotted space.
Thus, around the ice rink in Makarovo, a big dispute broke out, which was actively covered in the media and was discussed by the public. The state customer actively propagated his innocence in breaking the deadlines and making a mistake in the project, laying the blame on the contractor.
Referring to the violation of the deadlines for performance of work, the Customer made a decision on unilateral refusal to perform the contract, which threatened CJSC Aurora with inclusion in the register of bad faith suppliers and loss of business reputation.
But thanks to the well-formed legal position of the Legal Business Solutions in the Arbitration Court of the Sakhalin Region, the fault of the Customer in violation of the terms of the contract was proved, and the decision on unilateral refusal was declared invalid.