Other / unclassifiable — a classification, not a measurement. An on-box language model (Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-FP8, prompt version 1) read this channel’s own recent posts on 10 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 68% confidence. This is a model’s judgement about what the channel is likely to be about, not a fact this register measured the way a subscriber count or a view count is measured — it can be revised on a later pass, and it carries no weight anywhere else on this page. How this classification works, and why it has no browse page of its own yet.
Growth
38 measurements spanning 73 days, net +19. Dots are measurements; the straight line between them is drawn to join them, not to claim we know the path taken in between — snapshots are recorded only when a count changes, so gaps mean “no change observed”, never “interpolated”. The vertical axis spans 23,510–23,634 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded, most recent 20 of 38
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
17 Oct 2026, 16:57
23,584
-4
16 Oct 2026, 16:58
23,588
-5
15 Oct 2026, 19:47
23,593
-4
14 Oct 2026, 17:17
23,597
-6
13 Oct 2026, 04:56
23,603
-17
8 Oct 2026, 21:37
23,620
+12
4 Oct 2026, 12:39
23,608
+12
26 Sept 2026, 00:38
23,596
-4
19 Sept 2026, 07:17
23,600
-5
16 Sept 2026, 19:42
23,605
+8
15 Sept 2026, 01:19
23,597
+10
13 Sept 2026, 08:39
23,587
+2
11 Sept 2026, 12:15
23,585
-2
8 Sept 2026, 18:20
23,587
-4
5 Sept 2026, 10:42
23,591
+1
3 Sept 2026, 10:48
23,590
-4
2 Sept 2026, 03:58
23,594
+5
1 Sept 2026, 02:05
23,589
-1
31 Aug 2026, 00:24
23,590
-2
28 Aug 2026, 01:34
23,592
first reading
Engagement
122 posts held, back to 29 July 2026 — the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 100 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
3.62%
avg views ÷ 23,584 subscribers
Avg views / post
853
60 posts measured
Reaction rate
0.632%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
60
of 122 held
ERR is average views per post over the last 30 days divided by subscribers, the definition TGStat uses, so this figure is comparable with the one you will see elsewhere. It falls structurally as a channel grows: a high ERR on a small channel and a low one on a large channel describe reach mathematics, not quality. We publish the figure and the sample it came from and pass no verdict on it.
ER is defined industry-wide as (forwards + reactions + comments) ÷ views — note the denominator is views, not subscribers. Telegram’s public web preview carries views and reactions but not forward or comment counts, so the reaction rate above is the reactions term only and is therefore a floor: the true ER for this channel is higher by an amount we have not measured and will not estimate. It is computed over the 53 of 60 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.
What these figures were computed from
Window
Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 15 October 2026
Posts held
122 (29 July 2026 – 15 October 2026)
Views total
51,191
Reactions total
286
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
15 Oct 2026, 21:27 UTC
Views are a single reading per post, taken at the time above. A post published in the last day or two is still accumulating views, which pulls the 30-day average down slightly. That is a property of the standard definition rather than a fault in it, so we keep the definition rather than “correcting” the number into something nobody can reproduce.
Precision. Telegram publishes view counts on its public widget in short form — 8.12K, 3.7M — so any reading at or above 1,000 reaches us rounded to three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. Averages and rates derived from them are shown to the same precision rather than to the unit: a figure like 3,701,250 would assert digits nobody measured.
Reaction counts are published per emoji and rounded the same way, so a total below 1,000 is exact and a larger one is a sum that may carry a rounded component from each emoji above 1,000. Because it is a sum, it does not look rounded — read a large reaction total as three significant figures per contributing emoji rather than as the figure it prints.
What this channel posts
Video runtime
27s
Average length
14s
Measured directly from 2 videos with a duration reading, out of the posts we hold for this channel — not this channel’s whole posting history, only the sample this register has actually read. An exact reading to the second, taken from the post itself rather than from Telegram’s own rounded chrome, so it carries no ≈ mark.
Reaction mix
513 reactions across 99 posts, in 18 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 44.8% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
❤
230
44.8%
🔥
112
21.8%
👍
81
15.8%
🙏
21
4.09%
👏
18
3.51%
🥰
17
3.31%
😁
12
2.34%
❤🔥
7
1.36%
💯
6
1.17%
⚡
1
0.195%
🆒
1
0.195%
👌
1
0.195%
💘
1
0.195%
😢
1
0.195%
🙈
1
0.195%
🤔
1
0.195%
🤷♀
1
0.195%
🥴
1
0.195%
No sentiment is inferred, and none should be read in. This table is ordered by count and by nothing else. Emoji do not carry stable meaning across languages or communities — 🙏 is thanks in one channel and mourning in another — so we publish which ones were pressed and how often, and pass no judgement on what an audience meant by them.
Precision. Telegram publishes reaction counts per emoji and short-forms each one — 4.34K, 1.2M — so any single kind at or above 1,000 reaches us at three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. The shares above are ratios of those figures and carry the same error. This is also why the total here can differ slightly from a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page: both are sums of the same rounded parts, taken over samples with different edges.
Coverage. Reactions were read on 105 of the 122 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegram’s own count on each post — not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above — those same posts carry 517 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 122 most recent posts we hold, published 29 July 2026 to 15 October 2026, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.
Telegram Stars
Stars received
6
across the posts below
Posts paid on
4
of 120 we hold a reading for · 3%
Most on one post
3
single highest reading
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @corplawpro. Telegram publishes the count on the public post preview alongside ordinary reactions, and this register reads it there. It is the only figure on this site that measures money moving rather than attention.
Stars are not reactions, and the two are never added. They are rendered in the same strip on Telegram and counted in the same shape, but one is a tap and the other is a purchase. The reaction totals and the engagement rate elsewhere on this page exclude every figure in this section, and no rate here is computed against a reaction count.
This is not revenue, and we publish no currency figure. What a Star costs a reader and what it pays a channel are different numbers, Telegram takes a share we cannot observe, and the terms have changed. Converting a Star count into money would be an estimate dressed as a measurement, so the count is where we stop.
Counted over the 122 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 29 July 2026 to 15 October 2026. Star counts above 1,000 reach us in Telegram’s short form and carry the same three-significant-figure rounding as everything else on this page.
Advertising
Ad load
0.82%
1 of 122 posts carry an ad marker
Regulatory tokens
1
posts carrying an erid · 1 distinct token
Median views · ads
768
over 1 measured post
Median views · rest
989
over 119 measured posts
An ad marker, not a judgement about a post. A post is counted here because it carries one of two explicit markings: an erid token, which Russian law has required on paid placements since 2022 and which is issued against a specific advertising contract, or a #реклама / #ad hashtag in the body, which is the channel declaring it itself. The first is documentary; the second is a self-declaration and is weaker. No classifier reads the text and decides — nothing on this site guesses that a post is an advertisement.
This is a floor, and it can only ever be a floor. A channel that runs paid placements without marking them produces no marker for us to count, and an unmarked ad is indistinguishable from an ordinary post on the public surface. The ad load above therefore means “the share of posts that declared themselves”, never “the share of posts that were paid for”. A low figure is not evidence of a channel that runs few ads.
Both figures are medians, and no ratio between them is published. Each is a view reading that actually occurred on a post, picked by percentile_disc rather than averaged, so one viral post cannot move it and no interpolated value is invented between two readings. The sample on one side is under five posts, which is too thin to compare. The two figures are shown side by side with the count behind each, and deliberately not divided into a headline like “ads get x% fewer views” — an arithmetic that is easy to print and, at this sample size, means nothing.
Advertising tokens recorded on this entry
erid
Posts
First seen
Last seen
CQH36pWzJqVJ3LveMwiVeCA6xyx2PLjZHAEAkC46tFHzo4
1
31 August 2026
31 August 2026
A token repeated across several posts is one advertising contract placed more than once, which is what the identifier is for. The strings are reproduced exactly as they appeared in the post or in its click-through URL and are not validated against any registry — we record the marker a channel published, and whether it resolves to a real contract is a question for the register that issued it.
Measured over the 122 most recent posts we hold, published 29 July 2026 to 15 October 2026. Views are the latest single reading held for each post, and any reading at or above 1,000 is rounded by Telegram to three significant figures.
Реорганизация и досрочное взыскание долга: отсутствие угрозы предложено доказывать должнику
Внесённый Правительством законопроект № 1342008-8 предлагает изменить статью 60 ГК РФ: связать досрочное исполнение обязательства при реорганизации с существенной угрозой его своевременному исполнению.
Ключевая деталь — распределение бремени доказывания. Требование кредитора предлагается отклонять, если реорганизуемое юридич…
Какие доводы в защиту директора убедят суд
«Сделку одобрили участники», «общество рассчитывало получить прибыль», «срок исковой давности уже истёк» — каждый из этих доводов может стать частью защиты директора. Для его обоснования придётся восстановить конкретные обстоятельства: как участники голосовали, какую экономическую цель преследовало общество, когда появилась возможность узнать о нарушении. Именно при проверк…
Добровольность механизма выплат по Указу № 529 не освобождает российского должника от исполнения обязательств по еврооблигациям
Интровест Лимитэд потребовала взыскать с АК «Алроса» невыплаченный купонный доход по еврооблигациям 158,1 тыс. долларов США и проценты по ст. 395 ГК РФ.
Компания владела облигациями Alrosa Finance S.A. номиналом 1,7 млн долларов. После введения санкций выплаты через иностранную инфраструкт…
Можно ли взыскать объявленные дивиденды, если решение об их выплате нарушало закон?
Верховный суд рассмотрит спор, в котором мажоритарный акционер потребовал выплатить дивиденды, объявленные его собственными голосами при недостаточности чистых активов общества.
2 октября жалоба передана в экономколлегию: дело № А41-27237/2025, определение № 305-ЭС26-8406(1). Заседание назначено на 2 ноября 2026 года.
АО «Ремвооруж…
После признания сделки недействительной суд должен проверить не только возврат имущества, но и доход от его использования, а также действия директора по исполнению реституции
#корпоративные_споры
ООО «Топаз» в лице участника Юрченкова С.В. потребовало взыскать с Юрченкова А.В. и директора общества Юрченкова В.А. убытки, связанные с использованием недвижимости, ранее выведенной из общества по недействительным сделка…
Получил деньги и вышел из общества: когда участнику придётся их вернуть
Общество арендовало у участника с долей 5,67% земельный участок и нежилые помещения. Арендную плату перечислили одним платежом за весь срок договоров. Получив деньги, участник подал заявление о выходе из общества. После смены директора и проведения аудита другой участник потребовал признать договоры недействительными и вернуть перечисленные сред…
Равные доли и корпоративный конфликт не препятствуют исключению участника, если его поведение парализует деятельность общества
#корпоративные_споры
Участники ООО «Залив» Чучук Н.С. и Бибиков С.В. владели по 50% долей. Чучук Н.С. потребовал исключить Бибикова С.В. из общества, ссылаясь на систематическое блокирование корпоративных решений, неучастие в развитии бизнеса и многочисленные споры с обществом.
Первая и ап…
ВС определит пределы применения правил иностранной биржи в споре «Русала» с акционером
Верховный суд проверит, правомерно ли «Русал» отказался включить предложения «Суал Партнерс» в повестку внеочередного общего собрания акционеров, сославшись на устав и правила листинга Гонконгской биржи.
В августе 2024 года «Суал» потребовал вынести на собрание три вопроса:
— изменение устава;
— утверждение положения о взаимодейс…
Расходы общества на обслуживание имущества аффилированной компании нельзя автоматически считать убытками: сначала нужно установить, использовалось ли это имущество в деятельности общества
#ответственность_директора
ООО «Центр аддитивных технологий «Основа» потребовало взыскать с бывшего директора Сивко С.А. 2,05 млн руб. убытков.
Общество ссылалось на то, что в 2020–2022 годах за его счет приобретались расходные ма…
📣 Подготовили дайджест самых интересных судебных кейсов и новостей по корпоративному праву за эту неделю!
📎 Рецензию на судебную экспертизу нельзя отклонять только потому, что ее составление прямо не урегулировано законом
📎 Размывание доли миноритария через допэмиссию требует экономического обоснования: формального большинства для такого решения недостаточно
📎 Мосбиржа отметила акции ещё восьми компаний за неполно…
Самые популярные корпоративные споры
Недавно делилась общей статистикой по корпспорам, сегодня анализирую «внутри» — смотрим какие иски чаще всего попадают в суды.
В 2025 году арбитражные суды первой инстанции окончили 18 992 корпоративных дела. Среди отдельно выделенных в судебной статистике подкатегорий лидируют три направления:
1️⃣ Споры об акциях, долях и связанных с ними правах
Сюда относятся споры о принадл…
Участник материнского общества может требовать документы дочерней компании, если они связаны с деятельностью основного общества и необходимы для реализации корпоративных прав
#корпоративные_споры
Бегларян Т.К., владеющий 24,901% ООО «Молоко Зауралья», потребовал предоставить документы, в том числе относящиеся к деятельности его дочернего общества — ООО «Торговый Дом «Молоко Зауралья», 100% долей которого принадлежи…
Showing the 12 most recent of 122 posts we hold for @corplawpro. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.
Stars beside a post are paid reactions — Telegram Stars, bought with money and spent on that post. They are a different unit from reactions and are never added to them, here or anywhere else on this page.
Polls
The poll we hold for this entry, as Telegram rendered it when we read the post. A poll’s figures keep moving after that, so each one is dated.
Коллеги, нужна ваша помощь!
Мы планируем бесплатную дискуссию на сентябрь и хотим посвятить ее цифровым активам.
Стоит ли нам проводить эту дискуссию, будет ли вам интересно? Также можете предложить свой вариант темы в комментариях
Чем цифровой рубль отличается от других цифровых активов32%
Как устроен рынок криптовалюты: участники и их взаимодействие49%
Изъятие криптовалюты27%
Не интересует20%
The shares total 128%, above 100: this poll accepts more than one answer per voter. No per-option vote count is published, so the number of voters who chose each option is not derivable and is not shown.
Percentages only — there are no per-option vote counts here, because Telegram publishes none. The public post preview gives each option’s share and a single voter total, and nothing else. Multiplying one by the other would produce a per-option tally that looks measured and is not: the shares are rounded to whole numbers before we ever see them. We print what was published and leave the column that does not exist empty.
The shares need not add up to 100. Rounding alone puts many polls at 99 or 101. A poll that allows more than one answer per voter runs well past 100 by design, and several here do. The bars are drawn against a fixed 100% track at each option’s own percentage rather than normalised to the total, so a poll that exceeds it shows that it does instead of being quietly rescaled.
Read from the 122 most recent posts we hold, published 29 July 2026 to 15 October 2026. Telegram labels each poll by kind — an anonymous poll, a quiz, a closed set of final results — and that label is reproduced rather than paraphrased.
Forward network
Republished by
Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.
Built only from forwarded posts we have actually read, on both sides. Coverage is early and deliberately incomplete: a missing link means we have not read the post that would prove it, never that the relationship does not exist. Counts are distinct forwarded posts observed, so they only ever go up as we read more.
Mentions
Named by 11 registered channels — every channel on the register whose own posts have named this one, by its current username or any other username it currently holds, merged from two separately captured readings of the same fact so a namer caught by only one of them is not missed and a namer both caught is not counted twice. A username this channel has since dropped is not matched — that handle may belong to someone else now, and crediting today’s namer to yesterday’s owner would misattribute it.
Named by
Channels on the register whose posts name this channel's handle.
A mention is a weaker signal than a forward and is counted separately for that reason — naming a channel is not republishing it, and a handle in a post body is easy to place deliberately. The post counts beside each row below are distinct posts in which the handle appeared, from posts we have read on both sides — the “Named by N registered channels” figure above is a different count, of distinct NAMING CHANNELS rather than posts, and is not the sum of the rows under it.
Channels Telegram recommends alongside this one
Telegram’s own answer, not this register’s. When this register asks Telegram’s API what is similar to this channel, this is the list it returns, in the exact order Telegram returns it — never re-sorted by subscribers or by anything else this register measures. The relationship, and the order, are Telegram’s; we record them and date them, and make no claim of our own about which of these channels actually resemble this one.
Read from Telegram’s recommendation API, most recently 18 September 2026. Telegram holds a list like this for a small and growing share of the register — how this is measured, and why most channel pages show nothing here.
Appears in Telegram’s recommendations for other channels
The reverse of the list above, and a different kind of signal. This does not require this channel to have ever been asked about directly — each row below is a channel we DID ask Telegram about, whose Telegram-generated list happened to include this one. A channel can appear here with an empty list above it, because being named by someone else’s query is independent of having been queried itself.
Субсидиарная ответственность • Case by Case @subsidiarka_kdl · 21,028 Telegram ranks this channel #1 of 88 here — alongside 87 others — read 25 September 2026
Дмитрий Мирончук | Закон и право @ruslaw · 25,352 Telegram ranks this channel #6 of 86 here — alongside 85 others — read 14 September 2026
Доктор Права @doktorprava · 20,914 Telegram ranks this channel #8 of 86 here — alongside 85 others — read 25 September 2026
Библиотека юриста @library_lawyer · 25,689 Telegram ranks this channel #9 of 82 here — alongside 81 others — read 14 September 2026
Private Law Library | PLL Право @privlawlib · 34,127 Telegram ranks this channel #13 of 88 here — alongside 87 others — read 4 September 2026
PRO Семейные права @prosemuy · 20,198 Telegram ranks this channel #14 of 82 here — alongside 81 others — read 28 September 2026
Право.ru @pravo_pravo · 57,812 Telegram ranks this channel #18 of 90 here — alongside 89 others — read 23 August 2026
СУДЕБНАЯ ПРАКТИКА IP и IT @sudpraktik_IPIT_demo · 22,892 Telegram ranks this channel #32 of 89 here — alongside 88 others — read 19 September 2026
Судебная практика по банкротству @sudpraktik_bankrot_demo · 26,790 Telegram ranks this channel #33 of 85 here — alongside 84 others — read 11 September 2026
Юстиграм @yustigram · 30,836 Telegram ranks this channel #33 of 83 here — alongside 82 others — read 6 September 2026
ilovedocs @ilovedocs · 19,314 Telegram ranks this channel #37 of 92 here — alongside 91 others — read 2 October 2026
Налоговые споры @nalogi_sud · 23,308 Telegram ranks this channel #41 of 92 here — alongside 91 others — read 18 September 2026
Судебная практика СКЭС ВС РФ @vs_court · 56,374 Telegram ranks this channel #41 of 88 here — alongside 87 others — read 23 August 2026
Конституционный Суд @ksrf_ru · 28,109 Telegram ranks this channel #43 of 85 here — alongside 84 others — read 10 September 2026
Новости ВС РФ @vsrf_ru · 59,795 Telegram ranks this channel #47 of 84 here — alongside 83 others — read 23 August 2026
ЮРИСПРУДЕНЦИЯ @yrisprudencia · 23,652 Telegram ranks this channel #49 of 86 here — alongside 85 others — read 17 September 2026
Loader from SVO @loaderfromSVO · 40,387 Telegram ranks this channel #49 of 88 here — alongside 87 others — read 30 August 2026
Поворот на Право @povorotnapravo · 50,757 Telegram ranks this channel #49 of 87 here — alongside 86 others — read 25 August 2026
ТРУДОВЫЕ СПОРЫ @sudpraktik_trud · 26,827 Telegram ranks this channel #52 of 88 here — alongside 87 others — read 11 September 2026
Юридические вакансии @legal_jobs · 36,042 Telegram ranks this channel #52 of 89 here — alongside 88 others — read 2 September 2026
Народный Юрист @PeopleIsLawyer · 23,662 Telegram ranks this channel #58 of 84 here — alongside 83 others — read 17 September 2026
ЛИЧНЫЕ НАЛОГИ @persontaxes · 31,360 Telegram ranks this channel #59 of 91 here — alongside 90 others — read 6 September 2026
РУЛЬФЫ, ИЛЬФЫ И ИНХАУСЫ @LawFirms · 21,619 Telegram ranks this channel #67 of 93 here — alongside 92 others — read 23 September 2026
Мы́тарь @mytar_rf · 27,427 Telegram ranks this channel #67 of 89 here — alongside 88 others — read 10 September 2026
This channel appears in 26 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists in total, of which the 24 where it ranks highest are shown above. Each is Telegram’s list for THAT channel, not this one — see how this is measured.
Cite this entry
A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 17 October 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Корпоративные споры • Case by Case” (@corplawpro), 23,584 subscribers as measured 17 October 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/corplawpro.
Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.