Call Leave a request
BC-SCU should regulate the right to exchange land shares

BC-SCU should regulate the right to exchange land shares

The procedure for resolving land disputes in Ukraine can be called “order” with a stretch! Due to the endlessly extended land moratorium, controversial issues in the field of land relations arise systematically.

In fact, the presence of registration of ownership of land implies that it is the property of a specific person with all the ensuing legal consequences, but …

There is a moratorium!

It restricts this right of Ukrainians and does not allow them to fully dispose of this type of real estate.

Arising in connection with this “misunderstanding” are resolved in court! And misunderstandings of a higher order, called exceptional legal problems, are resolved in the Supreme Court of Ukraine!

So, in the near future, the highest judicial instance should solve another legal problem related to the moratorium on the sale of land. The case regarding the alienation of land under a land exchange agreement will be considered.

On January 23, 2019, the Supreme Court of Ukraine adopted a ruling in case No. 227/1506/18, by which it submitted to the Grand Chamber for consideration the prosecutor’s cassation complaint regarding the recognition of the agricultural land exchange agreement as invalid, since it became necessary to deviate from the current legal conclusions.

BC-SCU will consider the need to derogate from the withdrawal of the SCU

“Now the exchange of land shares (shares) in the period between the holding of meetings of the owners of shares regarding the distribution of land plots and the issuance of state certificates for the right of ownership to their owners is allowed according to the “share for share” scheme under Art. 14th Law of Ukraine “On the procedure for allocation in kind (on the ground) of land plots to owners of land shares (shares)”.

The above position is regulated by the already irrelevant conclusion in case No. 6-464tss16, since it was made public before the decision of the European Court in the case of Zelenchuk and Tsitsyura v. Ukraine regarding the illegality of the moratorium on the sale of land.

In it, the ECHR made it clear to the Ukrainian authorities that the moratorium must end, as it unbalances the interests of owners and restricts their rights, violating the Convention on Human Rights.

Finally

In its ruling, the Supreme Court of Ukraine indicated that the decision of the ECHR clearly defines the fact that the land moratorium in our country violates the Civil Code and the Convention, therefore, the owners of land shares have the right, independently or through a legal services center, to demand in court compensation for damage caused by state restriction of their property rights.

14.02.2019

429

YOU MAY BE INTERESTED IN
What to do if a court decision comes to collect a loan debt?

Many had to take out loans, and for a wide variety of purposes. It is not always possible to repay the debt fully and on time, which can potentially lead to a wide variety of difficulties. Sometimes the creditor tries to collect money through the courts. In such a situation, you need to understand your […]

Bar reform has slowed down, lawyers are trying to speed it up

The reform of the legal profession has been delayed! According to the Ukrainian human rights community, the failure to adopt draft law No. 9055 “On the Bar and Lawyer Activities”, which should bring the activities of lawyers into line with the significantly changed procedural legislation, threatens the independence of the constitutional institution of the bar […]

How to choose a good lawyer?

Sooner or later, almost everyone may have problems with the law. This can apply to a variety of situations, ranging from the most harmless to quite serious. But in any case, it is important to turn to competent specialists who are well versed in a specific topic and have all the necessary skills and tools […]

The plaintiff threatened the judge for not explaining the terms of the lease

Even a solution to an economic dispute can become a breeding ground for threats! For example, the consideration of one of the cases, during which the plaintiff asked to explain to him certain clauses of the land plot lease agreement, ended with the tenant dissatisfied with the court decision not in his favor, took it […]

BC-Supreme Court of Ukraine “forbade” Privat to collect % and fines on credit cards

By its decision in case No. 342/180/17 of 03/07/19, the BC-Supreme Court of Ukraine “broke” the established judicial practice on the collection of overdue debt on PrivatBank credit cards! From this date, the terms and conditions for the provision of banking services posted on the pages of the PrivatBank website: Are not considered a public […]

Supreme Court of Ukraine on an additional period for accepting an inheritance

According to the rule established by law, the inheritance is accepted within 6 months, counted from the moment of opening the inheritance. The law allows for the possibility of extending this period if the heir, for some good reason, did not have time to enter into inheritance rights. The disputed points of “validity” of reasons […]

Address

01133, Kyiv, blvd. Lesi Ukrainky 26 (block L26), office 613

Email

info@grandliga.com.ua

Phone number

+380443395088

We work

Schedule: from 10:00 to 18:00
Weekend: Sunday

Make a route