"Galenika" in bankruptcy lost a dispute worth five million euros against the Capital City, the state of Montenegro and the company "Hemomont", and the final verdict after five years determined that, after all, they are not the owners of several plots of land and buildings in Podgorica.
Last month, the Court of Appeal upheld the Commercial Court's ruling in a dispute initiated by "Galenika" in 2020, seeking to establish that they are the owners of valuable real estate covering an area of almost 12.500 square meters near Krivi most.
The second-instance court rejected the plaintiff's appeal and upheld the earlier decision rejecting the claim as unfounded.
Bankruptcy trustee of Galenika in bankruptcy Dragan Milić, who took over that position in 2023, told "Vijesti" that he would do everything to ensure that the final ruling of the Court of Appeal does not affect the employees' claims.
The verdict also established the claim of the Capital City against "Galenica" in the amount of 31.050 euros, as well as the claim of "Hemomont" in the amount of 41.850 euros, based on compensation for the costs of the civil proceedings.
The Court of Appeals upheld the Commercial Court's verdict from July last year and rejected as unfounded the appeal of "Galenika" in bankruptcy.
The lawsuit by “Galenika” concerned the determination of ownership rights in the amount of 1/1 to real estate registered in the cadastral municipality of Podgorica III. The judgment listed the real estate that was the subject of the claim, including several cadastral plots, buildings and business premises.
The Commercial Court rejected the plaintiff's request in its first instance verdict, and the Court of Appeal has now ruled that such a decision was correct and lawful.
After the first-instance decision, “Galenika” filed an appeal, claiming that the Commercial Court committed significant violations of the provisions of civil procedure, that it failed to properly establish the facts and that it incorrectly applied substantive law.
In the appeal, they also claimed that they had a valid basis for acquisition - a contract, and that a geodetic expert in the proceedings determined that these were identical real estate properties pursuant to that contract, which are the subject of these proceedings and were registered in the name of the defendants. “Galenika” in bankruptcy also claimed that it was determined in the proceedings that they had validly acquired ownership of the real estate properties in question, based on the investment contract - assignment of real estate dated 08.10.1997., in connection with which the decision of the Real Estate Directorate, PJ Podgorica, dated 14.10.1997. was issued, and it was registered in the real estate properties in question, while all subsequent registrations in favor of the defendants are without basis.
The Court of Appeal, however, concluded that the appeal was unfounded.
The verdict states that the first instance court correctly determined that this was a dispute based on a contract, and that a large amount of evidence was presented in the proceedings, including expert testimony.
The judgment explains in more detail that the proceedings considered issues of property identification and changes in cadastral records over time. The court mentions that property lists and parcel designations have changed, and that it was important in the proceedings to determine whether the properties claimed by the plaintiff match the properties currently registered in the records.
Therefore, as stated, the court also dealt with issues related to cadastral changes, studies and documentation accompanying changes to plots, as well as previous registrations and registration bases.
"Since the plaintiff did not register the ownership right to the subject real estate, and since he did not present any evidence to establish that he acquired the ownership right on another basis, in particular that he had conscientious and lawful possession of the subject real estate, or that it was not in the possession of the third defendant, the first instance court correctly dismissed the claim as unfounded," the verdict states.
The Court of Appeal also noted that "Hemomont" has been in possession of the real estate for twenty years, which "Galenika" did not dispute during the proceedings, and that from the time Habitpharm was founded until the filing of the lawsuit, it had no knowledge of the plaintiff's claims to the disputed real estate, since it was not registered in the real estate cadastre, and not even de facto, since the real estate was not in the plaintiff's possession.
The decision to suspend operations at Galenika was made in early 2019, and bankruptcy was declared six months later, after the Tax Administration revoked the debt rescheduling decision. The pharmaceutical company employed 68 people at the time, and its account was frozen for five and a half years in the amount of 6,5 million euros.
“Galenika” had 13 pharmacies in Montenegro, some of which, three years before the bankruptcy, were subject to enforcement due to a loan debt of 2,25 million euros. The state then sued “Heta asset resolution” and “Galenika”, claiming that the enforcement agent was not allowed to initiate enforcement on property in which the state has a quarter of ownership, but the dispute was lost.
The state's founding contribution consisted of $4,25 million worth of warehouses for various purposes, land, roads, installations, equipment, machinery, and the value of buildings and equipment in pharmacies in Podgorica and on the coast. The remaining 75 percent of ownership was in the hands of "Galenika" from Belgrade.
Bonus video:
