Baku Court of Appeal (BAC) canceled its decision to exclude journalists from the trial between “Azur” and “FB-Company”

The Baku Appellation Court (BAC) is considering the claim of the owners of the commercial company “FB-Company” Anar Garibov and Agha Aliyev, who are defended by lawyer Enver Amiraliev, against the “Azur” shopping center owned by Fuad Rzayev and Babek Babayev. On February 1, the third meeting was held, in which Judge Vusala Bakhyshova decided to conduct the third examination of the quantity, cost and condition of branded goods taken out of the rented trading floor without the permission of the owners and stored in a room unsuitable for storing clothes. For this episode in the four-year conflict, Garibov and Aliyev suffered a half a million manats damage. There were also violations of several points of the criminal code. In particular, the plaintiffs consider their property to be partly missing and partly damaged because of the illegal actions of Azur officials.

Turan considers the court proceedings between the tenants of the commercial premises and the two owners of the “Azur” company, one of them is a son of a major government official, to be a peculiarity of the process. In the hands of those who suffered from arbitrariness, a ten-year contract with the owners of the trading premises Rzayev and Babayev (“Azur”), which they violated on several points. Rzayev and Babayev evicted the tenants, grossly violating the terms of the contract. If BAC decides in favor of the victims, ignoring the possible pressure of contract breakers, then the BAC verdict will mark the success of Azerbaijan's government reform program for the courts.

The judge said that confusion reigns in the materials of the case, which consists of ten volumes; she did not find in the case documents on the acceptance and delivery of goods presented at the last session of the court of first instance. The judge instructed the representative of  “FB-Company” to find out the location of the submitted documents in the case file and to make a page-by-page inventory of all the evidence submitted to the court of first instance. The injured party brought witnesses to the court - employees of the company, in order to explain to the court the condition of the goods and equipment of the company before the theft and after being placed in an unsuitable room. Witnesses can also confirm the truth of more than 1600 documents signed by them and presented to the court, proving the correctness of the plaintiff.

Announcing the beginning of the session, Judge Bakhshaliyeva informed about the appeal to the court from journalists wishing to attend BAC sessions. We add that Turan sent a letter to the chairman of the BAC with a request about the legality of the actions of Bakhshaliyeva, who forbade journalists from attending the second meeting on this  trial.

The judge asked for the opinion of the participants in the trial, noting that there is a lawsuit between companies that have their own trade secrets. The judge added, saying that company earnings records could be considered trade secrets. The injured party did not object to the admission of the press to the trial since there are no secrets from society in their activities. However, “Azur's” attorney demanded a closed trial. When asked by Garibov what the reason was, the defender said that the lease contract and the settlements on it were a trade secret. After a brief deliberation, the judge ruled that the trial be open "for the time being", adding that in some cases the hearings could be held without the participation of the press.

Further, the assessment of damage caused by “Azur” to tenants was discussed. The judge recalled the wishes of the parties for a re-examination of goods taken out of the trading floor - branded clothing that became unusable from being kept in an inappropriate room. The plaintiff's lawyer Amiraliev reported on the preserved specifications, cost and codes of the removed goods. On them it is possible to establish the damage caused to tenants. Before the assessment of these goods was carried out by specialists of the State Center for Expertise of the Ministry of Justice in 2021. The expert of this Center has previously participated in the trial. The examination confirmed damage to property with damage in the amount of 503,662 manats. In addition, the injured party alleges the loss of goods in the amount of 410,994 manats, and the damage caused to the company from lost profits in the amount of 390,760 manats.”

Discussing the question of the judge about which commission, from which department will evaluate the property - unsold clothes and shoes with the price tags on them, “Azur's” defender opposed the re-evaluation of the goods contained in the premises of this company. But the judge considers the importance of conducting an examination for a quick resolution of the trial. Both sides need to bring in experts, she said. Azur's lawyer reiterated his unwillingness to re-examination, considering the outcome of the first examination satisfactory. At the same time, the situation is rather strange - the representative of “Azur”, who had previously disagreed with the results of the previous examination at all previous meetings, suddenly announced that the results of the previous expert assessment were enough to consider the case. The representative of “FB-Company”, in response, declared his readiness to pay for the work of the experts invited by them, and the opposite side (Azur) should not interfere with the examination. According to Amiraliev's lawyer, the “Azur” company admits that it took out the property of the tenants, it is only necessary to establish the final amount of damage. To do this, the injured party insists on a re-examination of the goods.

After discussion, the judges decided to satisfy the claim of the injured party for a re-examination of the company's goods, with a video recording of the process of the experts' work. The judge ordered the other side to provide conditions for the work of experts.

The next BAC hearing on this case is scheduled for March 1.

Previous articles about this trial:

• The trial on the suit of a businessman claiming more than a million bankruptcy through the fault of the “Azure” shopping center
• Baku Court of Appeal forbade the press to observe process of  "FB-Company" lawsuit against "Azur Shopping Center"Social