Facts
A writ was refused for alleged lack of notice. Documents had been sent to addresses in the loan and guarantee agreements.
Holding
The Supreme Court quashed the refusal and remitted the case. Dispatch to the supplied addresses and the reasons for non-receipt required examination.
Limits
Non-receipt attributable to the recipient may amount to delivery. Proper dispatch and the applicable rules remain relevant. Source: paragraph 17 of the Supreme Court Presidium Review of 26 December 2018.
Evidence that changes the notice assessment
The Court read Article 3 of Law 382-FZ and Civil Code Article 165.1 alongside dispatch to contractual addresses. The agreed method, address, delivery or attempted-delivery record and reasons for non-receipt matter. Non-attendance alone does not establish defective notice.
Limits of the holding
The example does not deem every sent letter received. Proper dispatch and the circumstances of non-delivery must be established. The Supreme Court quashed the refusal and remitted the application; its determination did not itself issue an enforcement writ.
General information. The applicable legal framework depends on the particular dispute, seat and enforcement country.