Legal solutions that get us further, together.

The Court examined our claims concerning the five-year limitation period of the tax authorities’ right to tax assessment and the unconstitutionality of laws stipulating any further extension of the tax authorities’ right and made them accepted. The Court held that the prescription period must, in total, have a reasonable duration, granting the authorities the power to exercise effective control establishing the taxpayers’ compliance with their tax obligations, without encouraging the inaction of the public sector. An elongated prescription period of the relevant obligations would expose taxpayers to long periods of legal uncertainty and put the public sector at risk of failing to collect tax liabilities. In conclusion, the Court ruled in favor of our clients, annulled all tax-induced penalties, and ordered the refund of all unduly paid taxes, with interest.

Foreign court accepted all our pleas and ordered the distribution of high-value estate assets from a foreign trustee to our client-legal entity. In this specific case, the Court made a judgment in relation to the application of international law, the validity of a last will term, the validity of applicable law, the legal effect of the trust according to Greek law and at last the distribution of the inherited assets to our client, their legal beneficiary.

Our firm lodged an opposition statement against the registration application of a similar trademark at the Intellectual Property Office of the EU (EUIPO), for reasons that the recently filed trademark protected the same goods and services as our client’s and that both trademarks were highly similar visually, orally, and conceptually. The Court made all our pleas accepted, ruled that there existed a risk of confusion for the public because of the trademarks’ likelihood, and as a result, rejected the registration application of the competitive trademark.

Our client, a legal entity, inherited a percentage of joint ownership of a real estate property, on term to sell the inherited properties for the fulfillment of an ultimate purpose set in the last will of the deceased. Due to disagreement with the co-owner of the properties on the issue of their sale, which would lead to the term set by the deceased being left unfulfilled, the Court, responding to our client’s claim, allowed the legal entity to lease the properties, instead of selling them, interpreting the actual will of the deceased and the spirit of its provisions.

Successful representation of respondent in legal proceedings initiated by the landlord against the former, with the claim to pay all due uncollected rents and compensation. The Court made our pleas accepted, in specific it ruled that the leasing agreement should have been subject to a specific legal form and rejected the lawsuit of our opponent in all its claims. The Court reached the reasoning that the legal requirements for the conclusion of the leasing agreement were not met in the specific case, thus rendering the latter legally invalid. Consequently, the Court ruled that no rights and obligations were ever formed between the contracting parties.

Successful representation of complainant and owner, claiming before the Court the restitution of his property, which he had rented to the tenant under a commercial leasing agreement. The Court made our claims accepted that the opponent and tenant had infringed a contract term, that this event alone constitutes misuse of the leased property, and ordered the immediate eviction of the tenant, in conjunction with a provision for compensation.

The Court accepted our claims, concerning the limitation of the opponent’s declaratory action for the recognition of the last will’s invalidity, due to lack of legitimate interest on their side, and proceeded to the issuance of a certificate of succession in favour of our client.