The court sided with the residents of the building on Narimanov Street.

THIS MATERIAL (INFORMATION) WAS PRODUCED AND DISTRIBUTED BY FOREIGN AGENT MEMO LLC, OR CONCERNING THE ACTIVITIES OF FOREIGN AGENT MEMO LLC.

The Rostov-on-Don administration lost a dispute with residents of a building on Narimanov Street, where a staircase collapsed last year. Authorities attempted to obtain a further expert assessment, but the cassation court denied their request.

"Caucasian Knot" reported that in January 2024, the first staircase of a five-story building on Narimanov Street in Rostov-on-Don collapsed. Authorities promised to increase compensation to residents for property loss from 30,000 to 100,000 rubles. In January, it became known that the results of the appraisal of the square meter of living space did not satisfy the administration, and they requested a new one.

The Fourth Cassation Court of General Jurisdiction in Krasnodar rejected the Rostov-on-Don administration's appeal against payments to residents of a building on Narimanov Street, whose entrance collapsed in January of last year, 161.ru reported on September 27.

Residents of the building are unable to receive compensation for their housing, despite two appraisals being conducted. The results of these appraisals did not satisfy city authorities. The Rostov Regional Court ordered a re-examination, but the cassation court, to which the residents appealed, denied the officials' request.

According to Rostov-on-Don City Duma deputy Natalya Oskina, all of the administration's cassation claims were submitted to the same judge. A complaint was filed against him with the court chairman, along with motions to remove him under civil procedural law. After this, the decision was made in favor of the residents.

Elena Varchenko, a resident of the building, told the publication that after the court's decision, the residents received calls from the administration asking for payment details.

On April 28, Viktor Berezhnoy, the former head of the Voroshilovsky District Administration, was acquitted by the court of negligence charges. The judge concluded that the official's actions did not constitute a crime. The residents of the building agreed with the court's position and demanded that the real culprits be punished. However, in early June, the prosecution challenged the acquittal.