On the consequences of termination of the contract: the last Plenum

Date of publication: 02.28.2018 Number of views: 1693

Author: Ermakova (Stepanova) Lyubov Vladimirovna Leading lawyer of the Legal Agency of St. Petersburg Articles written: 20

You can refuse the loan, the agreement with the real estate agency for the provision of services, and the agreement with the tenant. Moreover, if the contract is terminated correctly, then there are practically no consequences such as penalties, fines or penalties. We will talk about how to terminate the contract, how to get out of it with minimal losses.

When can you terminate the contract?

In what situations can a contract be terminated? Art. 450 Civil Code of the Russian Federation:

1. By agreement of both parties.
2. By a court decision, if one of the parties has significantly violated the provisions of the agreement, or in other situations provided for by the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. Usually this is a violation of the terms of provision of services or performance of work, in case of violation of obligations (failure to transfer an advance payment, rental payments).
3. At the initiative of one of the parties. The outcome in this case may be termination by mutual agreement or by court decision. This depends on whether the other party agrees to the terms of termination.

For your information! If one of the parties has the right to terminate the contract unilaterally, then it must act in good faith when exercising this right.

By mutual agreement, counterparties can terminate a previously concluded agreement even when this condition is not specified in it.

When is a unilateral refusal of a contract for paid services possible?

As a general rule

Unilateral withdrawal from the contract is not allowed. It is possible only in those cases and for the reasons that:

• provided by law
• provided for by the contract

For a contract for the provision of services concluded by a consumer, such grounds are established by legislation on the protection of consumer rights.

Grounds for unilateral refusal of a service agreement:

①No information provided

When concluding a contract for the provision of services, you were not provided with the necessary and reliable information about the contractor and/or service, which influenced the correctness of your choice.

There is a feature -

You can cancel the contract within a reasonable time from the moment you learn that you were not provided with the necessary and reliable information.

What is considered a reasonable period?

Two months is not a reasonable period. Two weeks is a reasonable period.

Download a sample claim for a refund for a service due to failure to provide information.

② Refusal of services without violation of your rights by the contractor.

You simply decided to refuse services: you changed your mind, circumstances changed, you found the same services cheaper, or any other reason.

By law, you have the right to refuse any service at any time (even when it has already been partially provided).

There is a feature -

After your refusal, the contractor must return the money to you for the service minus the actual expenses incurred related to the fulfillment of obligations under the contract

Download a sample waiver of a service agreement for this situation.

③Violation of the deadline for eliminating service deficiencies

During the provision of the service to you or after its acceptance, you discovered deficiencies in the service and demanded that the contractor eliminate them.

But the service deficiencies were not corrected within the time limit you set.

In this case, you have the right to refuse to fulfill the contract for the provision of services and demand full compensation for losses.

Download a sample waiver of a contract due to a violation of the deadline for eliminating defects.

④ You have discovered a significant flaw in the service

The presence of a significant defect allows you to unilaterally cancel the contract for the provision of services immediately after discovering such a defect.

⑤ The possibility of unilateral refusal is provided for in the contract

If you want to cancel the contract for the provision of services, first of all, carefully look at the contract itself.

There is a possibility,

that it contains conditions allowing you to refuse its execution under certain conditions or terminate it by agreement with the performer.

If such a condition exists,

you need to evaluate how acceptable it is for you and what legal consequences it will entail (withholding part of the payment or so on).

The content of such a refusal depends on the content of the service contract itself, so it is better for you to contact a lawyer to draw it up.

Nuances of terminating a service agreement

When signing a service agreement, it is assumed that certain work will be performed in favor of the customer. Usually the performer performs them gradually, sometimes for a long time. Payment can be made in stages or in full after completion of the work. If the contract is terminated not immediately after conclusion, but after some time has passed, when part of the work has been completed, this means that the parties may have the following questions:

• how the contractor will transfer incompletely completed work to the customer;
• in what way and in what amount will the customer pay for the work performed;
• how the costs of the implementing organization will be taken into account;
• how the costs of the customer company for the purchase of materials, tools or equipment that are necessary to complete the work will be taken into account.

Therefore, these points must also be specified in the agreement. To do this, the parties must make mutual settlements, agree on procedures for paying for work or transferring unused materials.

Procedure for terminating the contract by agreement

Art. 452 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation talks about the procedure for terminating a contract. The agreement must be drawn up in the same form in which the contract was made. This means that a written form of agreement requires a written form of agreement. If the agreements were oral, then the agreement should be in this form, that is, nothing needs to be in writing.

The procedure for termination by mutual consent will be as follows:

1. The parties mutually agreed to terminate the contract. They need to evaluate material and financial obligations and reconcile calculations. The contractor must report on the work done and materials used. He may have to return some of the materials. The customer evaluates the work and decides how he will receive the materials.
2. Acceptance of completed work. Draw up an act of acceptance and transfer of work. The deed may be part of the termination agreement.
3. Drawing up an agreement and its approval by both parties.
4. Signing the agreement.
5. Transfer of money, transfer of materials, tools, equipment, etc., that is, fulfillment of final obligations.

Attention! When resolving a matter in court, an agreement is not required.

Before concluding an agreement, you need to make sure that there are no restrictions that could make this document invalid (Clause 1 of Article 450 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation). For example, this cannot be done if the agreement is drawn up in favor of a third party who does not consent to early termination (clause 2 of Article 430 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation).

Consequences of termination of the contract. What to refer to when demanding back what was done

30.09.2014

Estimated reading time: 11 minutes.

Roman Bevzenko

The main question: the company entered into an agreement, which was partially fulfilled, but then for some reason was terminated. Special consequences of termination for a contract of this type are not established in the law, and the parties did not enter into an agreement on the consequences. How to determine whether counterparties owe each other something if, as a general rule, it is impossible to demand the return of what was performed before the termination of the contract (Clause 4 of Article 453 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation)? Decision: shortly before the abolition, the Plenum of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation adopted a resolution that explains exactly how to determine the obligations of the parties to each other in connection with the termination of the agreement. Some positions specified in this resolution changed the previous approaches of judicial practice. Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated 06.06.14 No. 35 “On the consequences of termination of a contract” (hereinafter referred to as Resolution No. 35) is devoted to those cases when general rules apply that determine the consequences of termination of contracts of any type (namely paragraph 3 of Article 450 and Article 453 of the Civil Code ), that is, when the law does not provide for special consequences and there is no agreement of the parties establishing these consequences. The need for clarification was associated with the not entirely successful formulation of the above provisions of the Civil Code: their literal interpretation in many cases did not allow achieving the protection of the violated rights and interests of the parties. In essence, Resolution No. 35 is an analysis of the consequences of termination of contracts in typical, most common situations. To apply the legal positions from Resolution No. 35, it is important to understand that they apply to any cases of termination of a contractual relationship - both by termination by agreement of the parties or by a court decision, and by unilateral expression of will (refusal of the contract), when it entails termination of the contract. The difference in these methods of terminating a contractual relationship does not matter for the consequences of its termination (clause 1 of Resolution No. 35). Development of judicial practice on the consequences of termination of contracts In the legal systems of different countries, there are two approaches to the consequences of termination of a contract. The first approach is retrospective: it is considered that there was no agreement at all and the parties must return to each other everything that was transferred under this agreement. The second approach (prospective) assumes that the contract is terminated only for the future. Accordingly, the parties should not return to each other what was already performed before the termination of the contract. In Russian civil legislation, a prospective model has been chosen, but the formulation of the relevant norms cannot be considered successful. According to paragraph 2 of Article 453 of the Civil Code, upon termination of the contract, the obligations of the parties cease, and in accordance with paragraph 4 of the same article, the parties do not have the right to demand the return of what they performed under the obligation before the change or termination of the contract, unless otherwise provided by law or agreement of the parties. A literal understanding of these formulations initially led to rather strange judicial practice. Consequences of the literal interpretation of paragraph 4 of Article 453 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. Almost immediately after the entry into force of the first part of the Civil Code, the following problem emerged in judicial practice. Let’s imagine that an agreement is concluded, an advance payment is made under it, then the agreement is terminated or one of the parties refuses it (when such a refusal is permissible by law or by the terms of the agreement itself). The advance has not been worked out or not fully worked out, that is, the other party has not provided counter-performance for the amount of the advance received. The question arises: can the party that transferred the advance demand its return in the unpaid part? If we take paragraph 4 of Article 453 of the Civil Code literally, then it cannot (and examples of such a grammatical interpretation of this norm have been encountered in judicial practice). But it is quite obvious that such a consequence is unfair for the party that transferred the advance, thereby violating its interests: it had no intention to reward the counterparty, and its counterparty has no economic grounds to enrich itself at its expense, since there was no counter-representation. Having discovered this problem, the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation proposed to apply the rules on unjust enrichment in such situations. This is how paragraph 1 of the information letter of the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated January 11, 2000 No. 49 “Review of the practice of considering disputes related to the application of rules on unjust enrichment” (hereinafter referred to as review No. 49) appeared, which states that when terminating a contract, a party is not deprived of the right to claim previously executed if the other party has unjustly enriched itself. Disadvantages of the total application of the rules on unjust enrichment. The more disputes about the termination of contracts with different plots appeared in judicial practice, the clearer it became that the application of the rules on unjust enrichment is not always a good solution. This is especially noticeable in cases where the question of an accessory obligation arose. For example, a supply agreement has been concluded with a provision for a penalty for late payment. The goods are shipped, accepted by the buyer, but not paid for. The supplier then abandoned the contract due to non-fulfillment of payment obligations. The supplier's fulfilled obligation to transfer the goods turned out to be without consideration. If the court recovers the cost of goods from the buyer as unjust enrichment, then for the delay in payment the supplier may be awarded a maximum interest under Article 395 of the Civil Code (clause 2 of Article 1107 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation). He cannot count on a contractual penalty, because if we assume that with the termination of the contract, the obligations of the parties ceased, then the buyer’s accessory obligation to pay a penalty for late payment also ceased. Another example: imagine that the buyer’s obligations in the described situation were secured by a guarantee. After termination of the contract, the supplier sees that the buyer does not have a very reliable financial position and it is better to demand money for the goods from the guarantor. But he cannot do this if he is guided by the idea that due to the termination of the contract, the obligations under this contract have ceased and only obligations arise from unjust enrichment. After all, the termination of the main obligation entails the termination of the guarantee (clause 1 of Article 367 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation). Fair? It is unlikely, because the supplier cannot receive in full what he could have counted on in terms of counter-representation if the contract had continued to be in force, although he had fulfilled his obligations under the contract in full. Another interpretation of paragraph 4 of Article 453 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. Having analyzed the accumulated unsuccessful judicial practice, several years after the appearance of review No. 49, in another information letter, the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation indicated that termination of the contract entails the termination of obligations for the future, but does not deprive the creditor of the right to demand from the debtor the amounts of the principal debt formed before the termination of the contract and property sanctions in connection with non-fulfillment or improper fulfillment of the contract (clause 1 of the information letter of the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated December 21, 2005 No. 104 “Review of the practice of application by arbitration courts of the norms of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation on some grounds for termination of obligations”, hereinafter referred to as review No. 104). ________________________________________ For example, in paragraph 7 of the information letter of the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated September 13, 2011 No. 147, there is a direct phrase that the provisions of a loan agreement terminated for the future apply to the borrower’s obligation to repay the funds that he has already received under this agreement. ________________________________________

In other words, the idea behind this approach is that once the contract is terminated, there is no future contract - the supplier no longer has to ship goods, the contractor no longer has to perform work, the contractor is no longer obligated to provide services, the bank is no longer obligated to issue new loan tranches, etc. , but the debts that had accrued at the time of termination of the contract retain their contractual nature and do not automatically turn into obligations from unjust enrichment. That is, the contract is terminated prospectively (for the future), but with the preservation of those requirements that the parties had already developed towards each other at the time of termination. Subsequently, this idea was also developed in terms of securing obligations under a terminated contract: after the termination of the contract from which the obligations secured by a pledge or guarantee arose, the pledge and guarantee continue to secure those of them that were not fulfilled and remain after the termination of the contract - for example, the principal amount of the debt and interest on the loan, rent arrears (clause 26 of the resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated 02/17/11 No. 10 “On some issues of application of the legislation on pledge”, clause 15 of the resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated 07/12/12 No. 42 “ On some issues of resolving disputes related to sureties"). It would seem that the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation gradually stopped considering the consequences of termination of contracts through the prism of unjust enrichment. And suddenly, in paragraph 65 of the joint plenum of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation and the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated April 29, 2010 No. 10/22 “On some issues […] related to the protection of property rights and other property rights” (hereinafter referred to as Resolution No. 10/22), this option. It states that in the event of termination of a real estate purchase and sale agreement, the seller who has not received payment has the right to demand the return of the property transferred to the buyer under the rules of unjust enrichment. Consistency in developed judicial practice. At first glance, it may seem that the practice of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation has vacillated from the idea of ​​applying the rules on unjust enrichment to the consequences of termination of a contract to the idea of ​​not applying them. But this is not so: in reality, the practice developed systematically. It’s just that when terminating contracts, there are several different typical situations (let’s call them scenarios) with different consequences. The first typical scenario is when one party transferred property under an agreement (for example, money or goods), the second party did not fulfill its obligations, because of this the contract is terminated, and the first party demands that what it transferred is returned to it. In these cases, the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation applied the rules on unjust enrichment (clause 1 of review No. 49, clause 65 of resolution No. 10/22). The second scenario is when, in similar circumstances, the first party does not demand the return of what it transferred under the agreement, but the consideration due to it. Here we are talking about an obligation arising from a contract. New approach from Resolution No. 35 The new Resolution No. 35 retains the developed approach to the interpretation of paragraphs 2 and 4 of Article 453 of the Civil Code: the contract is terminated for the future in terms of the debtor’s obligation to perform those actions that are the subject of the contract (ship goods, perform work, etc.) etc.), and paragraph 4 on the impossibility of reclaiming what has already been performed under a terminated contract applies only in cases where the interests of the parties are not violated - their counter-obligations by the time of termination have been fully fulfilled or partially fulfilled, but the amounts of the counter-provision are equivalent (clauses 3, 4 resolution No. 35). At the same time, Resolution No. 35 uses a more systematic approach, which is currently dominant in developed jurisdictions: in connection with the termination of the contract, obligations enter the liquidation stage, and within this stage it is necessary to “weigh” who owes whom. WE QUOTE THE DOCUMENT If, when considering a dispute related to the termination of an agreement under which one of the parties transferred any property into the ownership of the other party, the court found a violation of the equivalence of counter-provisions due to the failure or improper performance of its duties by one of the parties, the party that transferred the property has the right demand the return of what was transferred to the other party to the extent that this violates the equivalence of counter-provisions agreed upon by the parties (clause 5 of Resolution No. 35).

Within the meaning of this approach, all obligations related to the liquidation of a contract are of a contractual nature rather than a conditional one, therefore the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation does not call them in Resolution No. 35 obligations due to unjust enrichment. This allows you to maintain accessory obligations. The Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation uses a more cautious formulation: the provisions of Chapter 60 of the Civil Code may be applied to these relations of the parties, since otherwise is not established by law, by agreement of the parties and does not follow from the essence of the relationship (clause 5 of Resolution No. 35). In other words, the rules on unjust enrichment apply only in cases that are not directly covered by the legal positions set out in Resolution No. 35. Various scenarios for termination of a contract Two main scenarios for termination of a contract were described above. In practice, there are, of course, many more typical scenarios. The new resolution No. 35 contains the most common of them. Let's look at some in more detail. Thus, paragraphs 6.1–6.3 of Resolution No. 35 consider the consequences of termination of the contract in a situation where one party transferred any property to the other, the second party did not pay for it, the contract is terminated, but by this time the property was lost. The question of whether the second party should compensate the counterparty for the cost of this property is decided depending on a number of factors, in particular the reason for termination of the contract (whose fault it was). Paragraph 7 of Resolution No. 35 concerns the situation when the property transferred under a terminated contract was encumbered (for example, mortgaged) before its termination. If, upon termination of the contract, the property is to be returned to the party who transferred it, the question arises: does the encumbrance remain? Resolution No. 35 answers this question in the affirmative. The encumbrance remains because termination of the contract does not entail the annulment of the property right that was obtained on the basis of this contract, but the return of the property and the reverse transfer of ownership. That is, the party that receives its property back, the right of ownership to it arises in a derivative way (paragraph 1, paragraph 2, article 218 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation). Accordingly, there is no reason to reset the encumbrances that were established while the other party was the owner of this property. But you need to understand that the appearance of an encumbrance can affect the value of the property, therefore this circumstance must be taken into account when establishing the amount of mutual obligations of the parties within the framework of the liquidation stage of the agreement.

WE CITE THE DOCUMENT The size of the encumbrance is taken into account by the court when determining how much the value of the property returned to the plaintiff has decreased. If the encumbrance is significant, the plaintiff also has the right to assume that the property cannot be returned to him in the form in which it was transferred to the defendant, and demand compensation for its full value (clause 7 of resolution No. 35).

Of course, this explanation refers to situations where the third party in whose favor the encumbrance is established is in good faith. But there are also cases when the buyer, realizing that the matter is about to terminate the contract, fictitiously pledges the property received under the contract to his affiliate in order to harm the seller. Such cases must be dealt with using paragraph 4 of Article 1 and Article 10 of the Civil Code. Paragraph 10 of Resolution No. 35 is devoted to the question of the fate of securing contractual obligations in a situation where one party has fulfilled its obligations under the contract, but the second has not, and the first party, in connection with the termination of the contract, requires not the return of what was fulfilled, but a counter provision. The Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation has directly indicated that such a requirement is contractual, which means that the security is retained until the actual fulfillment of this obligation. WE QUOTE THE DOCUMENT If by the time of termination of the contract, executed in parts, the goods supplied, work performed, services rendered, including in the management of someone else’s business (under a commission agreement, trust management, etc.), have not been paid, then debt collection is carried out in accordance with the terms of the terminated contract and the provisions of law governing the relevant obligations. In this case, the party retains the right to collect the debt on the terms established by the agreement or the law governing the relevant contractual obligations, as well as the rights arising from security transactions, as well as the right to demand compensation for losses and collection of penalties on the day of actual fulfillment of the obligation (clause 10 of the resolution No. 35).

It is important to note that in terms of collecting penalties, the opposite approach was previously used in judicial practice - it was believed that the penalty was calculated only until the moment of termination of the contract (clause 1 of review No. 104). But this approach changed even before the appearance of Resolution No. 35, namely in paragraph 7 of the information letter of the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated September 13, 2011 No. 147 “Review of judicial practice in resolving disputes related to the application of the provisions of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation on a loan agreement.”

Source

Termination of the contract in part

Sometimes the parties do not want to terminate the contract completely. The possibility of renunciation of the contract regarding those obligations that were not fulfilled is prescribed by law (Article 450 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation).

In essence, this is simply a change in the terms of the contract; this can be formalized by concluding an additional agreement, which will make changes to the existing contract. It is not prohibited to draw up an agreement to terminate the contract in part with the consent of both parties. This is applicable in cases where the nature of the services provided makes it possible to divide their volume into parts.

Such an agreement will be similar to a standard termination agreement; it will need to specify which obligations the counterparties will no longer fulfill, how payment will be made, and other nuances.

Iskusstvoed.ru – network resource about culture and art

Views: 11,893

As a rule, amendment and termination of the contract by agreement of the parties is possible at any time (clause 1 of Article 450 of the Civil Code). At the request of one of the parties, the contract is terminated by the court only in the event of a significant violation of the contract by the other party or in cases provided for by law or contract. According to paragraph 2 of Art. 450 of the Civil Code, a violation of the contract by one of the parties is considered significant, which entails such damage for the other party that it is largely deprived of what it had the right to count on when concluding the contract. Article 451 of the Civil Code allows for unilateral amendment or termination of a contract due to a significant change in the circumstances from which the parties proceeded when concluding the contract. A change in circumstances is considered significant when they have changed so much that, if the parties could have foreseen it, the contract would not have been concluded by them at all or would have been concluded on significantly different terms. If the parties fail to reach an agreement to bring the contract into compliance with significantly changed circumstances or to terminate it, the contract may be terminated or amended by the court at the request of the interested party if a number of conditions provided for in paragraph 2 or paragraph 4 of Art. 451 Civil Code. In particular, to terminate the contract, it is necessary to establish the presence of the following four conditions simultaneously:

1) at the time of concluding the contract, the parties assumed that such a change in circumstances would not occur;

2) the change in circumstances was caused by reasons that the interested party could not overcome after their occurrence with the degree of care and prudence that was required of it by the nature of the contract and the conditions of turnover;

3) execution of the contract without changing its terms would so violate the relationship of property interests of the parties corresponding to the contract and would entail such damage for the interested party that it would largely lose what it had the right to count on when concluding the contract;

4) it does not follow from business customs or the essence of the contract that the risk of changes in circumstances is borne by the interested party.

According to paragraph 1 of Art. 452 of the Civil Code, an agreement to amend and terminate a contract is made in the same form as the contract, unless otherwise follows from the law, other legal acts, contract or business customs. If the agreement is amended, the content of the obligation based on this agreement changes accordingly. In this case, the obligation changes to the extent that the underlying contract has been changed. In the remaining part, the terms of the contract (for example, terms of work, quality guarantees, force majeure circumstances) are preserved in the same form, and therefore, the content of the contract obligation corresponding to these conditions is preserved in the same form.

If the change in the contract occurred by mutual agreement of the parties, then the obligation based on it changes accordingly from the moment the parties enter into an agreement to change the contract. However, another rule may follow from the content of the agreement or the nature of the change in the contract.

When an agreement is amended in court, the obligation based on it changes from the moment the court decision to amend the agreement enters into legal force.

Upon termination of the contract, the obligations of the parties cease (clause 2 of Article 453 of the Civil Code). In the event of termination of the contract, obligations are considered terminated from the moment the parties enter into an agreement to terminate the contract, and in the case of judicial termination - from the moment the court decision to terminate the contract enters into legal force (clause 3 of Article 453 of the Civil Code). According to the general rule enshrined in paragraph 4 of Art. 453 of the Civil Code, the parties do not have the right to demand the return of what they performed under the obligation before the change or termination of the contract, unless otherwise established by law or agreement of the parties.

If the contract was changed or terminated due to a significant violation of its terms by one of the parties, the other party has the right to demand compensation for losses caused by the change or termination of the contract (clause 5 of Article 453 of the Civil Code). The purpose of this rule, as follows from its wording, is to regulate the relations of the parties in cases where the basis for changing the contract was a violation of the contract, but it does not cover cases when such a basis was other reasons, in particular the impossibility of fulfilling the contract.

LiveJournal

How to draw up such an agreement

The written agreement is drawn up in free form; there is no standardized form. Typically, its structure looks the same as the agreement to which it is drawn up.

The written agreement is drawn up on an A4 sheet. Handwriting is acceptable. It is necessary to avoid colloquial words and expressions, ambiguous formulations, and inaccuracies. It is necessary to use a formal business style of speech.

The document must include the following information:

1. The name of the document, details of the agreement to which it is drawn up.
2. Date and place of agreement.
3. Information about the parties to the agreement. For an organization, write the full name of the person acting on behalf of the company, on the basis of which document he has authority. For individual entrepreneurs - full name and OGRNIP, passport details, registration address. For an individual - full name, passport details, registration address. The preamble practically repeats similar information from the contract.
4. The desire of both parties to terminate the previously signed agreement.
5. If one party must transfer funds to the other (advance payment, etc.), return materials, documents, tools, equipment, and calculations have been reconciled, then these facts are also indicated.
6. The time frame within which the parties must fulfill their obligations specified in this agreement.
7. The date from which the contract will come into legal force. As a rule, they write that the document will be valid from the moment it is signed.
8. Number of copies of the agreement.

The document ends with the details and signatures of the parties. It does not need to be notarized. If a representative acts on behalf of a company under a power of attorney, then it is necessary to check its validity period. If it has expired, the signature will be considered invalid. You should also pay attention to whether the representative’s powers include signing such papers.

If necessary, all required documents are attached to the agreement.

You can transfer the papers to the counterparty in person, by courier, or send them by mail with a certified letter with acknowledgment of receipt and a list of the contents. Sent to the address specified in the contract.

Agreement on termination of the contract for the provision of services for a legal entity

_________________________________________________________________________________________________, (name of organization)
is referred to as____hereinafter “Customer”, represented by

_________________________________________________________________________________________________, (position, full name)

acting on the basis of:______________________, on the one hand, and the Joint Stock Company "Regional Network Information Center", hereinafter referred to as the "Contractor", represented by General Director Nikolai Petrovich Molibog, acting on the basis of the Charter, on the other hand, collectively referred to as the Parties, have concluded this Agreement as follows:

1. Agreement No. _____________ dated “_____” ________________20__ is terminated from the date of signing of this Agreement by the Contractor.

2. The Contractor returns to the Customer the balance of funds not used for the provision of services under contract No. ______________ dated “_____” ________________20__. The balance of funds is returned no later than 10 business days from the date of signing this Agreement by the Contractor, according to the following details:

______________________________________________________________________________________________ (To be filled in if necessary if there is a balance of funds on the personal account of the agreement)

Bank: Settlement account: Correspondent account: Recipient: BIC: INN:

3. If, under this agreement, the Customer was provided with services for registering or renewing the registration of domain names in the domains .RU, .РФ, .NET.RU, .ORG.RU or .PP.RU and by the time the agreement was terminated, their registration period had not expired, then the registration of these domain names is canceled from the date of termination of the contract No- _________ dated “_____” _______________20__.

4. If, under this agreement, the Customer was provided with services for registering or renewing the registration of domain names in international domains and foreign national domains, and by the time the agreement was terminated, their registration period had not expired, then the registration of these domain names is canceled from the date of termination of the agreement No-_________ from “_____” _______________20__, unless the Registration Rules established by the administrator of the corresponding international or foreign national domain do not provide for a different period for revocation of the domain name.

5. All other services previously provided to the Customer under contract No-____________ dated “_____” _______________20__, the validity period of which had not expired at the time of termination of the contract, after termination of the contract continue to be valid until the end of their validity period without the possibility of further extension of their validity, unless otherwise is not provided for in the regulations of the corresponding service.

6. The parties agree that from the date of termination of the contract No. _________ dated “_____” _______________20__, the Contractor does not provide the services listed in the “List of Services Provided” and does not perform the actions provided for by the Regulations of the relevant services.

7. The parties have no mutual claims under agreement No-___________ dated “____”___________20__.

8. This Agreement is drawn up in two copies having equal legal force, one for each of the Parties.

9. Details of the parties:

Executor:

Customer:

RTF document