En UaRu
Call Leave a request

Supreme Court of Ukraine stopped family showdown over a shopping pavilion

By decision in case No. 202/3788 / 18 of 04.08.2020, the Supreme Court of Ukraine stopped the family showdown regarding the shopping pavilion, which the spouses had been sharing for several years.

The court determined that the trade tent is movable property, transactions in respect of which are not subject to state registration, but it is a common joint property. Accordingly, the division of this joint property of the spouses must be carried out in accordance with all legislative rules!

Previously! The happy family bought themselves a pavilion that was supposed to improve their financial well-being! Happiness did not last long, the family union began to burst at the seams, and with it the fate of the tent went downhill!

The marriage broke up, but … The former spouses turned out to be civilized people and decided that let the pavilion work – it brings money, but not to the family, but to each separately and equally, but …

The wife decided to quietly sell the business point so that the husband would not know. He would not have known if the ex-wife had not posted the announcement about the sale …

The man, personally did not deal with his wife, went straight to a consultation with a lawyer on the division of property, and then went to court with the demand:

  • divide the trade stall equally;
  • recover legal costs from the wife.

The court of first instance and the court of appeal refused to satisfy the claim!

Courts said that his demands were unfounded, and the circumstances of the joint purchase of the kiosk were unproven, since there was no state registration of ownership, and the kiosk itself was not real estate.

“The plaintiff appealed to the Supreme Court of Ukraine, demanding the establishment of the fact of the“ real estate ”of the trade tent for its division! The Ukrainian Supreme Court is a serious structure, it figured out everything and satisfied the plaintiff’s demands, substantiating its decision with specific legal norms, the list of which will be useful to everyone who will have to share trade pavilions”!

Rationale for the decision of the Supreme Court:

  1. The trade pavilion is not considered by law to be real estate, but is a temporary structure for commercial purposes, because it does not have a foundation and it can theoretically move in space (it regulates part 1 of article 181 and part 2 of article 181 of the Civil Code of Ukraine, as well as Law of Ukraine “On the regulation of urban planning activities”).
  2. The fact that the pavilion is not real estate suggests that notarization and state registration of lease agreements or alienation concerning it are not required by law, and the title to it is acquired in accordance with Art. 238 CCU.
  3. According to the law, a sales booth can be the joint property of spouses and is divided, like any other property, according to the rules established by law (in this case, according to part 1 of article 70 of the CCU).

11.07.2020

216

YOU MAY BE INTERESTED IN
The Supreme Court of Ukraine approved the binding nature of the treaty! Conclusion on case No. 456/2946/17

Initially! The legal entity filed a lawsuit against the individual in court, demanding the fulfillment of the obligation under the terms of the preliminary tripartite agreement with the transfer of advance payments for the further purchase of the apartment by the defendant. The claims were motivated by the fact that the applicant fulfilled his obligations […]

Division of cryptocurrency in the context of property division in divorce

Cryptocurrency is a form of digital currency that has gained significant influence on modern times, but a generalized understanding of its essence remains a subject of research. Although the topic of cryptocurrencies is not new, their importance in our lives is constantly increasing. As of January 2024, the legislation of Ukraine regarding the regulation of […]

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 […]

Representation of interests in the ICAC at the CCI of Ukraine

The International Commercial Arbitration Court (ICAC) at the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of Ukraine is one of the key institutions for resolving disputes in the field of international business. In this article, we will consider in which cases it is appropriate to apply to the ICAC, who has the right to such an application, […]

The case was considered by the Supreme Court of Ukraine

The Supreme Court of Ukraine did not allow the bank to prohibit its debtors from leaving Ukraine, since the CPCU does not have such a measure to secure claims as a temporary restriction of the right to travel abroad, even if a foreclosure procedure has been started with respect to mortgage property. Brief overview of […]

Judge goes to vacation – robbers set free!

The main “hero” of this material was a judge who went on vacation without settling all his current affairs, for which he was punished. In the opinion of the disciplinary body, which applied the sanctions initiated by the prosecutor’s office, the issue that the judge had to decide was not complicated and there were no […]

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