This Russian case concerns setting aside a default judgment where the defendant’s address was stated incorrectly. For general grounds, deadlines, court fees and the application, see the default-judgment cancellation guide. The individual facts, court order and scope of the result follow below.
The claimant supplied an incorrect address for the defendant, and court notices were sent there. The defendant learned of the default judgment after the claim had been heard. In case No. 2-2872/2020, Balashikha City Court set aside the judgment and reopened the proceedings. This case note explains what the original ruling actually establishes and what to check in a similar Russian civil dispute.
📅 Ruling: 20 January 2021. Legal sources checked: 9 October 2026.
⚖️ Case No. 2-2872/2020: notices sent to the wrong address
On 4 August 2020, Balashikha City Court in the Moscow Region issued a default judgment concerning recovery of property from unlawful possession and lost profits for the period of possession. The defendant applied to have it set aside, explaining that he had not been notified of the proceedings because he lived at a different address.
| Court and judge | Balashikha City Court, Moscow Region; Judge D. I. Lebedev |
|---|---|
| Default judgment | 4 August 2020, case No. 2-2872/2020 |
| Service problem | Notices and the judgment copy were sent to the address supplied by the claimant; the court established that the defendant lived elsewhere |
| Application timing | The court found the application timely, taking account of information about receipt of the judgment copy |
| Outcome on 20 January 2021 | Default judgment set aside; merits proceedings reopened; writs of execution recalled |
Personal details concealed in the visible copy are not reproduced here. The ruling does not disclose the precise date the defendant received the judgment or the substance of his evidence on the property claim.
🔎 The court considered two grounds
The court found that the defendant had not been properly notified at his place of residence and could not have reported the reasons for his absence in time. It also found that he had submitted circumstances and evidence capable of affecting the judgment. Both findings appear in the original ruling.
Current Article 242 of the Russian Code of Civil Procedure also requires both elements. This case does not establish that every address discrepancy automatically invalidates a judgment. Its effect depends on service, actual residence, participation in the proceedings and the defence submitted.
📂 Documents to examine
The following checklist is guidance for a comparable dispute. It does not mean that every document listed below was produced in case No. 2-2872/2020.
| Category | What to examine | What it explains |
|---|---|---|
| Service records | Claim form, summonses, envelopes, delivery receipts and records of returned mail | Where the court sent documents and the basis for treating notice as valid |
| Residence and address | Registration and residence documents for the hearing date, with a chronology of address changes | Why the address in the claim did not match the circumstances |
| Receipt of judgment | Postal receipt, acknowledgment, copy-issue record or electronic delivery information | Which date is relevant to checking the filing period |
| Merits defence | Contracts, calculations, payments and other documents relevant to the claimant’s demands | How the defence could affect the judgment |
Article 113 permits several methods of judicial notification. Examine all service records: absence of a paper letter alone does not establish that no valid notice was delivered by another means.
🧭 What to do after discovering the judgment
Get the judgment copy and case file, particularly evidence of service.
Identify the hearing date, receipt of the copy and any enforcement proceedings.
Explain the absence and attach a supported defence to the claim.
Setting aside the judgment reopens the dispute; a full merits defence is still needed.
Under Article 237(1), the defendant applies to the court that issued the default judgment within seven days after being served with its copy. If timing is uncertain, examine the dates and select the appropriate procedural remedy. Not receiving a letter does not mean a case can safely be ignored indefinitely.
Article 238 governs the application and attachments. On the checking date, Article 333.19(1)(12) of the Tax Code prescribes a RUB 1,500 fee for review of a default judgment by the issuing court. Applicable exemptions and possible deferral require separate assessment. Older statements that every such application is free should not be relied on for a current filing.
If enforcement has begun, Article 244 permits the issuing court to suspend enforcement while considering the application under the statutory procedure. Filing the application does not automatically stop collection. In this historical case, recall of the writs after the judgment was set aside appears expressly in the operative part.
Under Article 243, setting aside a default judgment reopens the merits proceedings. It does not dismiss the claim, establish that no debt exists or award money to the defendant. The published ruling does not disclose the eventual outcome of the reopened property dispute.
❓ Frequently asked questions
Does an incorrect address guarantee that the judgment will be set aside?
No. Here the court found defective notice and evidence capable of affecting the outcome. The significance of an address error must be assessed from the particular case file.
Must the defendant support a defence to the claim?
Yes. Explain which circumstances and documents could change the judgment. Do not limit the application to the address issue.
Which court receives the application?
The court that issued the default judgment. Identify the case and judgment, the relief requested, reasons for absence and necessary attachments.
Does setting aside the judgment mean the case has been won?
No. In case No. 2-2872/2020 it restored the opportunity to defend the claim. The result of the reopened proceedings is not established by this document.
Will bailiffs immediately stop collection when an application is filed?
There is no automatic consequence. Suspension and subsequent enforcement steps need separate examination. In this case, the court itself recalled the writs in its ruling setting aside the judgment.
📄 Original ruling and legal sources
Balashikha City Court ruling of 20 January 2021, case No. 2-2872/2020 — open original
An anonymised scanned copy. It sets aside a default judgment; it is not a final determination of the property claim.
Legal sources checked on . The historical ruling is distinguished from the rules applicable to a current filing:
- Code of Civil Procedure, Article 242 — grounds for setting aside.
- Article 237 — timing and appeal.
- Article 238 — application contents.
- Article 113 — service and notification.
- Article 243 — reopened proceedings and Article 244 — enforcement.
- Tax Code, Article 333.19 — court fee.
For the general procedure, see setting aside a default judgment in Russia. More individual cases are in the Practice section. A document-specific assessment can be requested through an initial consultation.