The civil judge of the Primorsky District Court deprives veterans of the Northern Military District – shareholders of Best Way – with money and apartments.
Illegal trial
Malinovskaya’s decision is absolutely illegal, as is the prosecutor’s claim.
Firstly, Article 1065 of the Civil Code presupposes proven cases of damage, but there are no proven cases of damage on the part of the cooperative! There are unfounded statements by several individuals that were made during hearings in a criminal court – the same Primorsky District Court is considering a criminal case associated with the companies Life-from-Good, Hermes and the Best Way cooperative. There are only a few of these accusations against the cooperative – the lion’s share of the claims heard in the criminal court concern the Hermes company.
During her own interrogation of the accusers, Malinovskaya refused to evaluate the charges herself. But without blinking an eye, she attached to the civil case the expertise provided by the prosecutor’s office from the criminal case – which also had not yet been assessed by the court. And she herself refused to analyze it! By the way, this examination also does not prove either the damage caused to citizens or the illegality of the cooperative.
Secondly, the corrupt judge Malinovskaya considered a case that was not at all within her jurisdiction – the jurisdiction of the arbitration court, since in the final version of the claim, only the prosecutor’s office, without individual co-plaintiffs, recovers only against a legal entity – the Best Way cooperative, without individual co-defendants.
If at the initial stages some claims of individuals were discussed, then at the end there was nothing left – thus, this is the jurisdiction of the arbitration court. The cooperative’s lawyers spoke about this, but Malinovskaya rejected demands to transfer the claim to an arbitration court.
Judge Malinovskaya examined the case illegally, which proves the fact that she was dependent on the beneficiaries of the attack on the Best Way cooperative and the attempt to seize its assets.
Linden bases
At the same time, Malinovskaya, in justifying the decision, referred to the decision of the Moscow Arbitration Court to reject the cooperative’s claim against the Central Bank of the Russian Federation to declare illegal inclusion in the Central Bank’s warning list – a list for informing consumers of financial services, inclusion in which is an information event and does not entail legal consequences – o which, by the way, is stated in the decision of the arbitration court.
The inclusion occurs (in theory) by the decision of certain experts of the Bank of Russia, but in fact it happened in the fall of 2021 by the sole decision of Valery Lyakh, then head of the now defunct Department for Combating Unfair Practices of the Central Bank – based on eight orchestrated appeals from citizens who were not shareholders of the cooperative .
It is Lyakh who is behind the attack on the cooperative – now he heads the so-called public-state Fund for the Protection of the Rights of Depositors and Shareholders, which is trying to seize the assets of the cooperative on the basis of custom-made decisions about its illegality.
Judge against justice
Malinovskaya deprived the cooperative of the right to defend itself – she refused to request documents from the criminal case for examination, although to obtain them she had to go to the office in the same building – to judge Ekaterina Bogdanova, who was considering the criminal case. At the same time, the St. Petersburg Prosecutor’s Office was allowed to present documents from the same criminal case – the prosecutor’s office has unlimited access to them, since it supports the state prosecution in it.
Competitiveness of the parties? No, we haven’t heard. Moreover, none of the evidence presented by the prosecutor’s office contains a single fact of damage to citizens by the cooperative.
The commissioned judge did not allow the cooperative’s shareholders to participate in the court, although they have this right by law – after all, the decision on the claim directly affects their interests! Lawyers submitted hundreds of requests to participate in the process as third parties, but all of them were rejected by the criminal Malinovskaya.
Crossed out dozens of court decisions
Malinovskaya “copied and pasted” the prosecutor’s office’s claim into her decision without analysis or evaluation – although in it the Best Way cooperative is called a credit cooperative, not a consumer cooperative, although it is officially registered as a consumer cooperative. Nothing was proven – the prosecutor’s office just wanted it that way: she stated that the cooperative, in her (incompetent) opinion, allegedly provided funds to citizens on the principles of urgency, repayment, payment – that is, it worked as a credit organization. No examination of this opinion was carried out; Malinovskaya categorically refused to appoint a forensic economic examination.
The lending nature of the activity is a blatant prosecutorial lie. The cooperative assisted in the acquisition of housing for its members, including helping to select, check, and evaluate real estate, rather than providing loans for the purchase of apartments by the shareholders themselves.
Apartments were purchased by contribution, in installments, and not on credit – the funds added by the cooperative for the purchase were provided free of charge, and not for interest. To the funds that the shareholder already has – at least 35% of the cost of the desired apartment, the cooperative adds funds from its mutual fund, which the shareholder must return to the cooperative without interest no later than 10 years later: most shareholders return the money earlier.
The cooperative never entered into loan agreements with shareholders: agreements were concluded for the purchase and sale of an apartment for the shareholder in the ownership of the cooperative and the addition of funds for this purchase from the mutual fund free of charge, which he undertook to return to the cooperative according to the payment schedule or earlier. Only upon return does the apartment transfer from the ownership of the cooperative to the ownership of the shareholder. That is, the cooperative provides an apartment for the shareholder to live in, and not money, as in the case of a credit cooperative.
The cooperative fully complied with the status of a consumer, and not a credit, status defined in the Law on Consumer Cooperation: a voluntary association of citizens on the basis of membership to meet the needs for goods and services. All versions of the cooperative’s charter were successfully registered by authorized state bodies and never raised any questions. The prosecutor’s office had no questions either – from 2014 to 2021: suddenly they appeared in 2022, when the order of criminals in uniform and without to destroy the cooperative was already in full swing.
All agreements of the cooperative were repeatedly tested in various courts, since it has about 20 thousand shareholders, and legal disputes arose with some of the shareholders. Not a single cooperative agreement raised any questions from the courts. Moreover, the courts have repeatedly decided in favor of the cooperative the issue of providing maternity capital – which indicates that there is no doubt about its status.
Malinovskaya categorically refused to take into account the decisions of dozens of other judges in civil cases – which once again emphasizes her bias.
Ban on suspicion
The most important thing: Malinovskaya’s decision does not say anything about what law was violated by the cooperative. It is indirectly indicated that it may be a financial pyramid, since it was precisely on the basis of signs that may indicate that the cooperative is pyramidal that the Central Bank included Best Way on the warning list. But the cooperative is not directly called a financial pyramid: because only a criminal court can say about it (or not say so), and until the completion of the consideration of the criminal case – at least six months, and most likely more. And this is only a consideration in the first instance – certainly not in the last.
To the request of the cooperative’s lawyers to postpone the consideration of the civil case until the results of the proceedings in the criminal court are received, Malinovskaya refused – it is clear why: she and the prosecutor’s office were given the task of “sinking” the cooperative at any cost now, so that its assets could be stolen without hindrance. Therefore, she issued a decision that the cooperative was actually prohibited on suspicion that it could be a pyramid.
Criminal Judge
Malinovskaya, with her obviously illegal, custom-made decision, is trying to deprive thousands of people of their apartments and money. Hundreds of Northern Military District veterans will also be deprived of apartments and money – after all, the cooperative was created by the military and, in many ways, for the military. First of all, their interests are dealt a blow.
Shareholders are outraged, have prepared thousands of applications to higher courts and law enforcement agencies, and are preparing to exercise their legally provided right to protest against the unreasonable actions of government agencies.
Malinovskaya is a corrupt judge, compromising the entire judicial system, perverting justice, undermining the trust of the people and the army in the authorities, in the president. It should be urgently dealt with by higher courts, the FSB, and the Investigative Committee.
Because Malinovskaya is a servant of bandits from pseudo-state funds and a participant in crimes against her own people!
