Supreme Court dismissed claim for employment period recognition due to lack of legal interest and statutory interpretation of state enterprise status.

The Supreme Court dismissed the plaintiff's cassation appeal and the underlying action to establish an employment period required for free share acquisition. The plaintiff argued that state-owned industrial combines were state enterprises, making his work in their branches count toward the required tenure, while the lower court found them to be separate legal entities. The Court ruled that the statutory definition of a 'state enterprise' encompasses the entire combine as a legal person, meaning employees of its branches are simultaneously employees of the state enterprise, thereby validating the lower court's interpretation and denying the plaintiff's specific procedural interest in this particular lawsuit.