Breakdown fee 8%

the cost of the order is the maximum amount of the penalty stipulated by the contract in the event of failure to meet construction deadlines, according to court documents

JSC "Baltic Plant"

shipbuilding plant. shareholders – Mezhprombank (88.2%, nominal holder), DKK (6%, nominal holder). financial indicators (RAS, 1st half of 2010): revenue – 226.4 million rubles, loss – 10 million rubles.

On February 24, the Federal Arbitration Court of the Northwestern District overturned the decision of the previous instance on the claim of FSUE Rosmorport, which demanded that the Baltic Shipyard pay 386 million rubles for failure to deliver two icebreakers on time, the court's website reports. The reason was that the courts of first and second instance did not take into account all the evidence. The case was sent to the Arbitration Court of St. Petersburg and the Leningrad Region for reconsideration.

Rosmorport ordered a diesel-electric icebreaker from the Baltic Shipyard in October 2004, and a year later signed a contract for the construction of another vessel. Both cost about 5.6 billion rubles. The shipyard was supposed to hand over the icebreaker Moskva to the customer in November 2007, and Sankt-Peterburg in February 2008. But Rosmorport received Moskva only in December 2008, and Sankt-Peterburg in July 2009, according to court documents.

The state enterprise filed a claim for recovery of a penalty for breach of contract at the end of 2009, but lost the case in the first instance in February of last year. In October, the appellate court sided with Rosmorport.

A representative of Rosmorport declined to comment. The Federal State Unitary Enterprise will continue the legal battle with the plant, says a source close to the enterprise. According to him, during the construction, the design of the vessels underwent significant changes - the customer was forced to make several thousand amendments to it, and the deadlines for the delivery of the icebreakers were clearly stipulated in the contract. The design was also included in the contract, responsibility for the project lies with the plant, he claims.

The deadlines for the orders were shifted due to the need to replace the ship's equipment, which is not the plant's fault, claims a representative of the United Industrial Corporation, which owns the enterprise. A source close to the plant says that the customer changed the technical specifications already during the construction of the ships, the second ship was being built before the end of the sea trials of the lead one.

Adjustments to the project during construction are not uncommon, especially for new series ships, says one of the St. Petersburg shipbuilders.

Rosmorport still has a chance to win the case; the arbitration court did not put an end to it, but returned it for reconsideration, notes Sergei Spasenov, head of the St. Petersburg practice of Pepeliaev Group.

Icebreakers without fines