The defendant in the case was the head of the developer SG “Razvitie” Alexander Ravtsov, the co-defendants were Olga Vyalova, Rasim Kurgunaev, Marina Zagorodskaya, Valentina Demyakhina, NanoTech LLC and RegionAvtotsentr LLC.
newsko.ru, 08/17/2023, “The Prosecutor General’s Office is trying to seize the territory of the former JSC “39 Arsenal” in Perm from the tenant through the court”: Rosavtotsentr LLC specializes in servicing equipment of the Ministry of Defense. Acquired the property complex of 39 Arsenal JSC. Then, in 2022, the company was renamed RegionAvtotsentr LLC. […]
The developer SG “Development”, according to information on the official website, has been operating since 2011. The group was founded in 2011. The head is the deputy of the Perm City Duma Alexey Raev. The structure includes six construction companies, some of them founded by Alexander Ravtsov. The company plans to build a residential complex on a plot leased from the Russian Federation behind Karl Marx Square. — Insert K.ru
Let us recall that JSC “39 Arsenal” was engaged in warranty repairs of military equipment that was sent to Russia’s foreign partners. The company itself is the heir to another large state company that repaired special equipment back in Soviet times. The 39 Arsenal company has been bankrupt since 2018, and the plant has not been operating for several years.
TASS, 09/12/2023, “The Kama Region Court upheld the claim of the Prosecutor General’s Office for the alienation of the property of JSC 39 Arsenal”: According to the website of the Federal Tax Service of Russia, JSC “39 Arsenal” was registered in Perm through reorganization in the form of transformation in February 2010. The main activity of the enterprise is the production of weapons and ammunition; additional activities include the production of workwear, logging, production of wooden structures and products, rubber products, concrete and metal products, as well as the construction of residential and non-residential buildings, etc. The authorized capital of the enterprise is 27 million 179 thousand rubles. — Insert K.ru
In 2020, RegionAvtotsentr LLC bought the buildings and equipment of the bankrupt Arsenal, owned by Rostec, for 60 million rubles. In May 2021, the property was sold to Olga Vyalova, Rasim Kurgunaev and Marina Zagorodskaya. Then in the same year it was bought by Alexander Ravtsov. In addition, he managed to lease a 4-hectare plot until 2070.
According to the Prosecutor General’s Office, the 2021 transactions are void, since “they violated the public interest in ensuring the defense and security of the country.” That is, the winner of the auction was obliged to preserve the intended purpose of the property to fulfill the state defense order. However, such a clause was not specified in contracts for the sale of assets to individuals, therefore, it is now impossible to use the objects for their intended purpose.
The plaintiff also believes that Ravtsov bought the site for the construction of mid-rise residential buildings. The RegionAvtotsentr society removed some of the production equipment from the plant’s territory. In turn, the supervisory authority demanded that Kurgunaev, Vyalova and Zagorodskaya recover 95 million rubles each in favor of the state.
Representatives of the defendants categorically disagree with the arguments of the Prosecutor General’s Office. They believe that the claim is nonsense and cannot be considered within the framework of the bankruptcy of 39 Arsenal JSC.
First, the state allowed the plant to go bankrupt, then it waived its right of first refusal, and now the prosecutor’s office is filing a similar claim. The buildings of the former plant were built in 1911–1913, they are in terrible condition, it is impossible to force commercial organizations to comply with the State Defense Order in such conditions,” the defendants were indignant.
Representatives of RegionAvtotsentr LLC noted that the company removed some of the equipment from the enterprise to other sites for military orders. Moreover, two years ago the company sent a proposal to the Ministry of Defense to use the sites, but there is still no response. According to the lawyer, the plot acquired by Ravtsov can be developed with housing and this is completely legal.
The legal representative of the three defendant individuals asked the Prosecutor General’s Office how long the owner must maintain the property to fulfill the state defense order. The defendant stated that the owner is obliged to preserve such property for at least a hundred years, if necessary. Because the law does not define a time frame.
Kommersant.Ru, 09.12.2023, “The prosecutor’s office has assembled Arsenal”: Representatives of the defendants categorically disagreed with the claims. In their opinion, the prosecutor’s office could not handle such statements at all within the framework of its powers. Also, they believed, the claim cannot be considered within the framework of the bankruptcy case of 39 Arsenal JSC, which was completed long ago. According to RegionAvtotsentr, the enterprise has not carried out production activities since 2018, and did not provide it with state defense orders from the Ministry of Defense. […]
The representative of the three individual defendants, Fyodor Gerasimenko, noted that, according to the government decree, the main contractor for the defense order under the Arsenal 39 nomenclature is now Uraltransmash (Ekaterinburg). Therefore, there is no need to talk about its placement at the Perm site. — Insert K.ru
Lawyer Alexandra Ravtsova said that even if the transactions are declared invalid, the property will be transferred to the state only through restitution, that is, not for free.
The zoning of the site was established at the request of the Federal Property Management Agency to change the type of permitted use. It is located in a development zone, next to houses where tens of thousands of people live. According to the rules of land use and development, industrial enterprises cannot be located there,” the lawyer said at the trial.
According to her, the owner retained all the objects on the acquired site and did not cause any damage to the interests of the state.
As a result, the arbitration court satisfied the demands of the Prosecutor General’s Office and satisfied the claim in full. The defendants are ready to appeal the decision. […]