We currently have more than 500,000 state-owned properties. Almost 40 percent do not have state registration due to lack of funds for registration. This allows tricksters “quietly” (without concluding leases) to use it. Some of the judges decided to go even further in order to “legally” transfer state property to new owners “
On page 30 of the decision it is stated "However, as established by the decisions in cases №№ 50/503, 4 / 440,13 / 468, 30 /
So whose property is this? Let’s try to understand. At one time, SE “Kyiv Radio Plant” appealed to the Commercial Court with a claim to the State Joint-Stock Company “Kyiv Radio Plant” for the return of property located on the street. Boryspilska, 9, in Kyiv, namely: building 2, with an area of 7,886 square meters. m and rooms of the building 9. And in 2007 the Commercial Court came to the conclusion that this property is in state ownership. But, the attentive reader will tell, it is a question of property to the address: Boryspilska, 9, instead of Boryspilska, 8, as in our case.
We move on and read on p. 31 decisions: “As court decisions (these are four decisions of 2004, 2007 and 2011) established that real estate objects (addresses are indicated) do not belong to anyone ... state registrations (in 2015 and 2016) were carried out in the absence of of the title document on the basis of powers of attorney issued by the liquidator ... the court concludes that the decision, record and registration of the right of economic management of these real estate are illegal, and therefore subject to cancellation.
So registration is subject to cancellation or cancellation, and how can real estate be ownerless in the presence of registration?
‘We build-build and finally built...’
But on the recognition of real estate at: st. Boryspilska, 8 ownerless judge Ivchenko didn’t stop. He went further in his decision, investigating the construction of real estate: Boryspilska, 8, House of Culture ‘Dnipro’ at st. Boryspilska, 10 ... ”.
This judge was completely confused: at the beginning of the sentence he wrote — “do not belong to anyone”, then noted that “the right of ownership was registered”, and then decided for himself to cancel.
A simple thing is clear: if you have grounds to abolish the right of economic management, then how to be with the owner “State of Ukraine represented by the Ministry of Economic Development and Trade of Ukraine”?
But this is not for our judge. He did not see the owner and could not find out the owner and recognizes this property as OWNLESS.
And then by his decision he cancels all contracts of sale at auction and registration and transfers ownership to the state? No! He transfers ownership to a public organization that has been illegally using this property for 20 years without paying a penny to the state.
Judge AM Ivchenko, after considering the case, makes a decision, not a decision. Why? And because the decision comes into force immediately after its announcement and can be appealed to the court of appeal. And the decision comes into force after consideration of case in appellate court. Meanwhile, neither justice nor justice is felt in this Resolution!
We now have approximately more than 500,000 state-owned properties. Almost 40 percent currently do not have state registration due to lack of funds for registration. But third parties use many options quietly and without rent. And now they will come and “motivate” the judge, who will later recognize the property as ownerless and transfer it to the property of clever dealers.
We hope that the judges of the appellate court will professionally understand this case and at least return this property to state ownership.