In particular, the Economic Collegium will examine case No. A18-2014/2024 concerning public interest in an investment project.

An investment agreement was concluded between Magasa Residence LLC and the Ministry of Economic Development of Ingushetia for the construction of a cottage village. The project, with an investment volume of 676.8 million rubles and a commitment to create more than 100 jobs, was granted large-scale status, which allowed the investor to lease the land without bidding.

The legality of the transaction was challenged by the prosecutor's office. According to the plaintiff, the agreement was fictitious and was concluded in circumvention of public interests. The prosecutor pointed out that the project does not address the social issues of the subsidized region: it does not provide housing for privileged categories of citizens and has virtually no impact on the unemployment rate. Despite these arguments, the courts of three instances sided with the investor. The Supreme Court of the Russian Federation is to settle this dispute based on the complaint filed by the Prosecutor General's Office.

According to Stanislav Dobshevich, a partner at KKMP, judicial practice more often deals with disputes arising from the improper performance of such contracts. At the same time, the problem of transferring state or municipal property without a tender remains a “classic” one, and supervision of compliance with the law in this area is traditionally entrusted to the prosecutor's office.

It is clear that the creation of social facilities such as kindergartens or creative centers is in the public interest. In this regard, it will be interesting to see how the Supreme Court defines the concept of “sufficiently satisfying the public interest,” Stanislav notes.

It is also important to understand whether the courts should take into account that without an investment project, the land will simply lie idle and, in general, not generate any income. In addition, the Supreme Court's opinion on the transfer of land plots without bidding could have a significant impact on investment projects in many regions that are being implemented on the basis of similar legislation.

“The decision in this case could lead to their collapse, freezing, or other consequences, depending on the outcome of the case,” Stanislav Dobshevich concludes.