{"id":48635,"date":"2025-03-12T09:51:57","date_gmt":"2025-03-12T06:51:57","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.teise.pro\/?p=48635"},"modified":"2025-03-12T09:51:59","modified_gmt":"2025-03-12T06:51:59","slug":"lapt-nesant-tiekejo-teisinio-suinteresuotumo-nera-pagrindo-vykdomu-sutarciu-pripazinti-negaliojanciomis","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.teise.pro\/index.php\/2025\/03\/12\/lapt-nesant-tiekejo-teisinio-suinteresuotumo-nera-pagrindo-vykdomu-sutarciu-pripazinti-negaliojanciomis\/","title":{"rendered":"Lapt: nesant tiek\u0117jo teisinio suinteresuotumo, n\u0117ra pagrindo vykdom\u0173 sutar\u010di\u0173 pripa\u017einti negaliojan\u010diomis"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p>Lietuvos apeliacinis teismas (Lapt), i\u0161nagrin\u0117j\u0119s vie\u0161\u0105j\u012f pirkim\u0105 organizavusios \u012fmon\u0117s ir pirkime dalyvavusios ie\u0161kov\u0117s (tiek\u0117jos) gin\u010d\u0105 (bylos Nr.e2A-172-790\/2025), konstatavo, kad, nesant tiek\u0117jo teisinio suinteresuotumo, n\u0117ra pagrindo vykdom\u0173 sutar\u010di\u0173 pripa\u017einti negaliojan\u010diomis.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Nagrin\u0117toje civilin\u0117je byloje gin\u010das kilo d\u0117l krovinini\u0173 automobili\u0173 vie\u0161ojo pirkimo. Net ir po pakartotinio pasi\u016blym\u0173 vertinimo, vie\u0161ojo pirkimo sutartys su ie\u0161kove nebuvo pasira\u0161ytos, nes ji pasi\u016blym\u0173 eil\u0117je liko antra. Pasira\u0161ius sutartis su kita vie\u0161\u0105j\u012f pirkim\u0105 laim\u0117jusia \u012fmone, ie\u0161kov\u0117 papra\u0161\u0117 leisti jai dalyvauti perduodant prekes. Susipa\u017einusi su pagal sutartis pristatytomis prek\u0117mis, ie\u0161kov\u0117 perkan\u010diajai organizacijai nurod\u0117, kad prek\u0117s neatitinka sutarties s\u0105lyg\u0173, ir pareikalavo jai prane\u0161ti apie pa\u0161alintus tr\u016bkumus, o jei tr\u016bkumai nebus i\u0161taisyti \u2013 nutraukti sutartis. Perkan\u010diajai organizacijai atsakius, kad n\u0117ra teisinio pagrindo nutraukti sutar\u010di\u0173, ie\u0161kov\u0117 kreip\u0117si \u012f teism\u0105, pra\u0161ydama min\u0117tas sutartis pripa\u017einti negaliojan\u010diomis d\u0117l atlikt\u0173 esmini\u0173 sutar\u010di\u0173 pakeitim\u0173, neatitinkan\u010di\u0173 Vie\u0161\u0173j\u0173 pirkim\u0173 \u012fstatymo nuostat\u0173, ir d\u0117l esmini\u0173 sutar\u010di\u0173 pa\u017eeidim\u0173 tiek\u0117jui per sutartyje nustatyt\u0105 termin\u0105 neva nei\u0161taisius pristatyt\u0173 preki\u0173 tr\u016bkum\u0173.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Apeliacinis teismas, i\u0161nagrin\u0117j\u0119s ie\u0161kov\u0117s pateikt\u0105 apeliacin\u012f skund\u0105, sutiko su apygardos teismo i\u0161vada, kad ie\u0161kov\u0117 neturi teisinio suinteresuotumo teikti teismui ie\u0161kin\u012f d\u0117l su kitu tiek\u0117ju sudaryt\u0173 sutar\u010di\u0173 pripa\u017einimo negaliojan\u010diomis, ir paliko galioti sprendim\u0105 ie\u0161kin\u012f atmesti.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Apeliacin\u0117s instancijos teismas pa\u017eym\u0117jo, kad sutartys pripa\u017e\u012fstamos negaliojan\u010diomis nusta\u010dius \u0161iurk\u0161\u010dius Vie\u0161\u0173j\u0173 pirkim\u0173 \u012fstatym\u0173 nuostat\u0173 pa\u017eeidimus, ta\u010diau nagrin\u0117jamu atveju toki\u0173 pa\u017eeidim\u0173 nebuvo nustatyta \u2013 pristatytos prek\u0117s atitiko technin\u0119 specifikacij\u0105 arba buvo pristatytos lygiavert\u0117s prek\u0117s. Preki\u0173 tr\u016bkumai, nors ir per ilgesn\u012f termin\u0105, buvo i\u0161taisyti, pagal sutartis buvo apskai\u010diuoti delspinigiai, tod\u0117l tai nelaikytina sutar\u010di\u0173 pakeitimu, kaip teig\u0117 ie\u0161kov\u0117.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Be to, teismas pa\u017eym\u0117jo, kad teis\u0117tas ie\u0161kov\u0117s interesas gin\u010dyti sutartis gal\u0117t\u0173 b\u016bti tik tada, jei ji \u012frodyt\u0173, jog sutar\u010di\u0173 pakeitimais pirkimo s\u0105lygos buvo pakeistos taip, kad tai b\u016bt\u0173 tur\u0117j\u0119 \u012ftakos jos, kaip pirkimo dalyv\u0117s, galimybei sudaryti sutartis. Aptariamoje byloje toki\u0173 aplinkybi\u0173 ie\u0161kov\u0117 ne\u012frod\u0117.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>\u201eNepriklausomai nuo ie\u0161kov\u0117s statuso pirkimo eil\u0117je, sutarties u\u017edarumo principas suteikia teis\u0119 pagal sudaryt\u0105 sutart\u012f reikalauti prievoli\u0173 vykdymo tik sutarties \u0161alims. Ie\u0161kov\u0117, neb\u016bdama gin\u010dijam\u0173 sutar\u010di\u0173 \u0161alis, netur\u0117dama joki\u0173 i\u0161 sutar\u010di\u0173 kylan\u010di\u0173 teisi\u0173 ir pareig\u0173, neturi teis\u0117s reikalauti, kad tre\u010di\u0173j\u0173 asmen\u0173 ir perkan\u010diosios organizacijos sudarytos sutartys b\u016bt\u0173 pripa\u017eintos negaliojan\u010diomis, remiantis netinkamu sutar\u010di\u0173 vykdymu d\u0117l esminio sutar\u010di\u0173 pa\u017eeidimo\u201c, \u2013 konstatavo Apeliacinis teismas.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><em>Lietuvos apeliacinio teismo informacija<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Lietuvos apeliacinis teismas (Lapt), i\u0161nagrin\u0117j\u0119s vie\u0161\u0105j\u012f pirkim\u0105 organizavusios \u012fmon\u0117s ir pirkime dalyvavusios ie\u0161kov\u0117s (tiek\u0117jos) gin\u010d\u0105 (bylos Nr.e2A-172-790\/2025), konstatavo, kad, nesant tiek\u0117jo teisinio suinteresuotumo, n\u0117ra pagrindo vykdom\u0173 sutar\u010di\u0173 pripa\u017einti negaliojan\u010diomis. Nagrin\u0117toje civilin\u0117je byloje gin\u010das kilo d\u0117l krovinini\u0173 automobili\u0173 vie\u0161ojo pirkimo. Net ir po pakartotinio pasi\u016blym\u0173 vertinimo, vie\u0161ojo pirkimo sutartys su ie\u0161kove nebuvo pasira\u0161ytos, nes ji pasi\u016blym\u0173 &hellip;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":42997,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"episode_type":"","audio_file":"","duration":"","filesize":"","date_recorded":"","explicit":"","block":"","filesize_raw":""},"categories":[32],"tags":[380,1341,180],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.teise.pro\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/48635"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.teise.pro\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.teise.pro\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.teise.pro\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.teise.pro\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=48635"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.teise.pro\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/48635\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":48636,"href":"https:\/\/www.teise.pro\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/48635\/revisions\/48636"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.teise.pro\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/42997"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.teise.pro\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=48635"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.teise.pro\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=48635"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.teise.pro\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=48635"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}