In recent years, construction of houses and cottages in the suburbs is moving quite rapidly. Built up more and more land. But keep in mind that the construction of houses and cottages without special permit for the construction is illegal. Construction of buildings without permission from the Russian Civil Code (Article 222) defines as the unauthorized construction. Art.
222. Unauthorised construction of 1. Unauthorized construction of a residential building, other structure, building or other immovable property created on land not designated for that purpose in the manner prescribed by law and other legal acts, or created without obtaining the necessary permits for this or a material breach of town planning and building regulations. 2. A person who carries out the unauthorized construction, does not acquire the right of ownership. It may not dispose of construction – to sell, give, rent, lease, engage in other transactions. Unauthorised building subject to demolition to achieve its face or at his expense, except as provided in paragraph 3 of this article. 3.
Ownership of the unauthorized construction can be found by a court for the perpetrator of the building does not belong to him the land, provided that this section will be provided in due course that person under the erected building. Get all the facts for a more clear viewpoint with Richard LeFrak. Ownership of the unauthorized construction can be found by a court for a person to own, lifetime inheritable possession, permanent (perpetual) which is plot of land where construction carried out. In this case, the person for whom recognized the right of ownership of the building, shall reimburse the person to carry out its spending on construction in the amount determined by the court.
If the object is a real estate asset management, the contract shall be in the form required for a contract of sale of immovable property (paragraph 1 of Section 2, Art. 1017 Civil Code). This means that the contract of trust management of real estate must be enclosed in a simple writing by drawing a single document signed by the parties (Art. 550 CC RF). In this case the transfer of real property in trust subject to state registration in the same order as the transition rights to this property. (Paragraph 2 of subsection 2 of Art. 1017 Civil Code).
A contract of trust management of property is among the few instruments for which the legislator clearly indicates the significant conditions, without observing that he did not is concluded. The first such condition is an indication of the property transferred in trust. The second condition is the nomination of a citizen or a legal person, in the interests of which manages the property. This person may be a parent control, and any other person (the beneficiary). The Trustee may not be a beneficiary under a contract of trust Property Management (Clause 3, Article. 1015 Civil Code), as the meaning of the contract on trust management is that the manager does not act as trustee for its own interests, but in the interests of another person. As a general rule, the asset management business is, therefore, the contract specifies the size and form of compensation manager.
If the manager acts on the basis of grants given condition is not met. And finally, one of the essential terms of the agreement on trust management is the term of this contract. As conceived by the legislator that can with reasonable certainty exclude the possibility of covering the agreement on trust management of the actual transfer of property ownership to another person. In addition, it gives some stability to the parties of the contract. The maximum period for which shall be entered into a contract on trust management, is five years. Even if the text of the agreement specify a period longer than 5 years, it will still be concluded for five years. However, the trust property for certain kinds of property law may provide for other deadlines. But if after the expiration of the contract, neither party does not declare the termination of the contract, he deemed to be extended for the same period and under the same conditions as were provided by the contract (Section 2, Art. 1016 Civil Code).
This article is part of a block of articles on the answers to frequently asked questions when applying for legal advice on the website in this case, the creation and registration of companies (legal persons): Question: Private enterprise, was reorganized in the form of transformation into a limited liability company (hereinafter – the Company) and the Uniform State Register of Legal Entities and Individual Entrepreneurs entry was made on state registration of legal entity – limited liability company (hereinafter – the Company). Does the company the right to use the simplified taxation system (hereinafter – STS) from the date of state registration? Answer: According to the second part of Article 287 of the Tax Code of the Republic of Belarus (hereinafter – the Tax Code) organizations and individual entrepreneurs that have passed state registration in the year in which They claim to use a simplified system, the right to use the simplified system starting from the date of their registration, provided the payroll number of employees of the organization does not exceed 100 people. Organizations and individual entrepreneurs applying for the application of SST from the date of their registration within twenty working days from the date of state registration is served in the tax office putting on record a statement about the transition to SST, which contains information about the payroll number of employees and the organization selected the tax base (tax bases). In accordance with paragraph 1.1 of point 1 of the State registration of business entities, approved by Presidential Decree of January 16, 2009, 1, created (reorganized) entities, including economic partnerships and companies, unitary enterprises, production cooperatives, are subject to state registration. According to Ohanley, who has experience with these questions. In accordance with Article 53 of the Civil Code in Article 15 of the Law of the Republic of Belarus of 09.12.1992 2020-XII ‘On Business Companies’ reorganization of legal entity (merger, division, separation, transformation) may be carried out by the decision of the owner of the property (the founders and participants) or the body of the legal person authorized by the constituent documents, and in cases stipulated by legislative acts – by the decision of public authorities, including the court. Legal entity is considered to be reorganized, except in cases of reorganization by merger, the moment of state registration of the newly created legal entities. According to Article 15 of Law of the Republic of Belarus of 09.12.1992 2020-XII ‘On Companies’ and Article 54 of the Civil Code in the conversion of one entity type into a legal entity of another type (the change of legal form) to the newly created entity transferred rights and obligations of the reorganized legal entity in accordance with the act of transfer, except the rights and obligations which can not belong to the created legal entity. Based on the foregoing, the Company, resulting from the reorganization of private unitary enterprise in the form of transformation and registered in the Unified State Register of legal entities and individual entrepreneurs have the right to USN application from the date of registration.
It is also important to take into account the provisions of Art. 39 of the Law of Ukraine “On mortgage” that the court may deny the claim of a mortgagee on the early transfer of the subject mortgage, unless the debtor or mortgagor admitted if it is different debtor violates the fundamental obligation, or mortgage agreement without prejudice to the mortgagee, or alter the scope of its rights. This provision Law is an estimate, in connection with this subject in detail and motivate the court must conclude, subject to the controversial situation, which they viewed at the contents of this assessment and the concept does not contradict his application of general content and purpose of law, which regulated the specific relationship. In this case, must be considered and proportionate to the cost of mortgage debt assets. Thus, the district court Turijsk Volyn region were denied the claim of ZAO CB “Privatbank” in Masuk AS, Masyuk DM of foreclosure of the mortgaged property – house and land and evict the defendants from the house.
Such a decision by the court reference to Part 3. 39 of the Law of Ukraine “On Mortgage” justified by the fact that apart from the defendants in the disputed house from his birth live and recorded two young children, arrears on credit agreement is not commensurate with the cost of mortgages subject (case 2-85). The Supreme Court of Ukraine supports this position and recommends that courts give motivation to all the arguments of the parties in the case, is a must fair trial (Article 6 of the Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms).
The recognition of property rights through the courts – this is the procedure for obtaining property rights to which recourse citizens and legal persons in case all other means of obtaining property rights have been exhausted. Recognition property rights through the courts can be made in a number of cases of economic practice. We consider these cases in detail. Fairly common case is when a claim for recognition of property rights to the apartment served shareholders in new construction. This is due to those cases where developers have long time did not make out the ownership of the apartment for whatever reasons, mostly related to the harmonization with government agencies. The recognition of property rights to the apartment through the courts is an effective way to obtain property rights in such circumstances.
Another case of recognition of the right property through the court case is the recognition of property rights in connection with the prescription. These are the cases where a person owns the property is open for many years – for real estate for 15 years, for personal – 5 years others do not claim their rights to it, then the ownership may be considered for such a person. Are also common complaints for the recognition of property rights through the courts in cases where citizens are denied privatization of the apartment. The only option in this case is the recognition of ownership of the premises through the courts. In the privatization procedure also can be recognized right of ownership through the courts, for example, in the case death of a person had time to apply for privatization, but not dooformivshego it through. Frequent litigation against the estate. In such inheritance disputes tend to combine several lawsuits requirements, such as the inclusion of property in the succession mass and recognition of property rights through the courts for it. Thus, we examined a number of cases recognizing the right to own property through the courts. However, it is not exhaustive, and there are many other cases where ownership is recognized by the court.