Debt collection under the service agreement in the disputed period.
In the system of evidence, there were no acts on the provision of services signed by the parties, which is a necessary condition for proving the fact of rendering services. The Client of the security company, who is the owner of the property complex, knowing this, deliberately stopped signing and returning acts on the provision of services.
It was necessary to create a different system of evidence that, in aggregate, overcame the threshold of the lack of necessary evidence when considering a dispute regarding the recovery of debt under a service agreement.
According to the results of consideration of this case, the decision was made in favor of the Client of Moscow Bar Association.