En UaRu
Call Leave a request

The new owner is not entitled to evict the debtor from mortgage housing

The Supreme Court of Ukraine considered the case on the eviction of the former owner (debtor of the bank) from the apartment purchased (by the new owner). A relevant legal conclusion has been published, informative for real estate buyers and bank borrowers.

Thus, a new non-owner who has bought “risky” real estate from a mortgagee cannot evict a person without providing other housing from a mortgaged apartment, even one acquired at the expense of credit funds. It’s illegal!

The ban was established by the Supreme Court of Ukraine, promulgating a legal opinion on case No. 754/4727/16-c on 28.11.18!

By conclusion, the supreme instance canceled the decisions of the courts of previous instances, which satisfied the claim (requirement to remove obstacles in the implementation of the right of possession, use and disposal) of the company against two citizens who pledged an apartment as security for a consumer loan.

The Supreme Court of Ukraine categorically opposed the eviction of bank debtors “to nowhere” from mortgaged dwellings purchased with borrowed funds, backing up their decision with well-established jurisprudence and legal conclusions governing the moratorium on eviction.

The Supreme Court explained the following

“In a crisis, Ukrainian legislation is purposefully “corrected” by introducing restrictions that protect the rights of citizens from the threat of eviction arising from the failure to fulfill obligations secured by mortgages on foreign currency loans, since individuals borrowing in foreign currency can not influence the depreciation of the national currency and fluctuations in the exchange rate.”

The state in such conditions must ensure the balance of the rights of lenders and borrowers, and the courts, representing the authorities and the law, must ensure the protection of the rights of all participants in credit relations.

In the analyzed case, the first instance did not take into account the instructions of Part 2 of Art. 109 HC, at the time of consideration of the case, already containing a ban on the eviction of debtors without providing them with other living space.

The new owner of distressed real estate, in order to protect their rights, must file a claim for damages against the seller:

  1. If he proves that the mortgagee acted inappropriately – did not warn the buyer about the existing encumbrance as part of the obligation to fully inform, he will be able to partially renew his rights.
  2. Also, the problem will be resolved if the bank will comply with the legislation regarding the provision of another housing to the debtor.

Bank borrowers and lenders need to closely monitor the legislative activities of the Supreme Court of Ukraine in this area. Each case of eviction is individual.

In this situation, the debtor should have been evicted, and the fact that this did not happen is the result of the legal assistance of his lawyer, who managed to turn the current legislative restrictions in favor of his client.

08.02.2019

435

YOU MAY BE INTERESTED IN
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 […]

Conclusion of the Supreme Court of Ukraine on the impossibility of forced eviction

As a general rule of law, the owner has the right to evict from his residential property a person who lives there without sufficient grounds, but … By itself, the existence of ownership does not always automatically provide the owner with the opportunity to evict (discharge from the apartment or from the house) the one […]

Successful litigation strategy of protection in case of drink driving

Professional legal aid often ensures successful appeals against the decision of the first instance court. See for yourself how events can develop with one fresh example. The pensioner, a disabled person of the III group, was threatened with a fine in the amount of UAH 10 200.00 and deprivation of a driver’s license for a […]

SCU: PASSING THE MEDICAL COMMISSION AT WORKING HOURS – NOT ABSENTEEISM!

The Supreme Court of Ukraine considered case No. 699/640/18 (production No. 61-17310sv19) and on 04.12.2019 formed a legal conclusion, which “put in place” the employer who dismissed the employee under the “absenteeism” article. He counted as a truancy the day when she underwent a medical examination. DETAILS OF THE PROCEEDINGS The military unit’s employee filed […]

Is it legal to sublet land bypassing the lessor?

Is the transfer of leased land to sublease without the consent of the owner legal? If so, in what cases? If not, when? What does the law tell us about this and how are litigations resolved between the parties to such legal relations, which, due to ignorance of regulatory rules, violate the law? Thus, lease-contractual […]

Had delayed paying severance pay? Pay the fine!

The first thing every citizen leaving his old place of work thinks about is how much money will fall on the card as a severance pay. Naturally, he wants more and that’s okay! The employer who signs the dismissal order is thinking about how to pay less! And he can be understood too! But, the […]

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