What to do if your rights were infringed during the privatization process? Is it possible to cancel a real estate transfer agreement? What is needed for this? In this article we will briefly answer these important questions.
Who can argue?
Several parties may doubt the legality of an agreement on the gratuitous transfer of real estate into private ownership.
These include:
- individuals whose interests were affected by an unlawful contract;
- organizations representing municipal authorities;
- unitary enterprises to which this property was assigned.
According to Article 166 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, a privatization agreement may be considered unlawful due to its controversy. There may be several reasons for canceling the privatization of an apartment:
- the presence of citizens registered in the apartment who are not indicated in the document and have not previously participated in privatization;
- one of the adult participants in the process has already used his right to transfer property free of charge earlier;
- the legal right to do so participated in the procedure ;
- a citizen registered in the premises who has not reached the age of majority ;
- one of the participants in the process is incompetent ;
- false information was used , as well as false certificates;
- misunderstanding among the participants in the process;
- intentional misleading of one of the parties or coercion to carry out a procedure.
How can you cancel the process of privatization of an apartment?
REFERENCE! If one or more violations occurred during the registration of real estate, then you can have the privatization declared invalid. In this case, property rights must be restored to their previous state.
Statute of limitations
The period during which a claim can be filed is 3 years.
During this period, it is necessary to prepare documents and send them to the court.
Of course, there are cases when the trial drags on for several years. The main thing is that the claim must be filed within three years from the date of transfer of property.
At the end of the 3-year period, you can also challenge the decision and get a refusal to privatize the apartment, but in this case you will face long and rather complex procedures:
- restore and justify the statute of limitations of the claim;
- you must state compelling reasons for such late proceedings and submit them to the court for consideration;
- whether the case will proceed depends entirely on the decision of the judge, so without significant arguments you should not count on a positive result;
- collect and present to the court documentary evidence of illegal registration of property;
- The longer the period has passed, the more difficult it will be to restore and collect the necessary certificates and certificates.
IMPORTANT! You can even challenge decisions that were made more than 10 years ago.
However, whether an appeal will be considered after the expiration of the 3-year period depends on the “mood” of the court. In contrast, if an appeal is filed within the period provided by law, it will be considered by the court in any case.
Trial
- Yes, but only a court decision can determine the illegality of privatization, and therefore you will have to go to the courts.
- The first and most important thing you need to do is collect available evidence of violations when registering an apartment.
ADVICE! Collect all the facts - even the smallest evidence can play a decisive role in the court's decision.
Once you have collected the necessary information, you will need to take several steps:
- come to the court department at the location of the apartment;
- draw up a statement challenging the transfer of property;
- pay the state fee (approximately 200 rubles) and provide a receipt;
- attach the contract and the documentary evidence you have of your right to a share in the real estate;
- You also need to attach evidence of violations when preparing this document.
If the court, after considering the evidence presented, upholds your appeal, the transfer of property will be canceled - the rights to the property will return to their original position.
It is not always possible to quickly challenge privatization, so be patient. If you do not have a good knowledge of the laws, and you do not know how to competently remove an apartment from privatization, use the services of a good lawyer who will protect your rights.
Statement of claim (what must be written?)
- header , including the name of the court, information about the parties to the process and requirements;
- title , in our case “Statement of Claim for invalidation of the privatization agreement”;
- introduction , briefly indicating the essence of the claim;
- a list of violations committed by the defendant during registration;
- pleading part , which includes your legal requirements;
- list of attached documents;
- date of compilation and personal signature.
ATTENTION! When challenging privatization, you have the right to ask the court not only to cancel it, but also to apply other sanctions against the defendant.
If you find it difficult to complete the application yourself, you can seek help from private lawyers. The court office can provide you with a sample on which you can easily enter the necessary data yourself.
Challenging – judicial practice
Judicial practice in Russia shows that it is quite possible to achieve the cancellation or revision of a privatization agreement, especially when gross violations were committed during the registration process. This also applies to cases where the period for filing a claim has expired.
There are cases when citizens managed to challenge the decision 14 years after registration of the property. Of course, not all processes end so rosy. If you have concrete evidence of harassment of your rights, be sure to file a claim.
IMPORTANT! Only a court can invalidate an agreement, so you will have to write a statement and collect the necessary evidence of violations.
As practice shows, it is quite possible to protect your rights in Russia.
Useful video
Video clip about whether it is possible to challenge the privatization of an apartment:
Let's summarize. Who can terminate the legal privatization of an apartment? Both individuals and municipal authorities can challenge the right of ownership. There may be several reasons for challenging a contract.
The application period is 3 years. After this period, it will be very difficult to obtain a review of the transfer of property. Therefore, if you want to cancel an existing decision to privatize an apartment, take into account the statute of limitations.
The statute of limitations for the privatization of an apartment is 2023
The transfer of municipal property to residents does not always occur according to the law. If the rights of citizens are violated, this is a reason for a judicial appeal to review the transaction. It is important to draw up the application correctly and meet the statute of limitations for the privatization of the apartment. Today we’ll look at how much it is and how to calculate it correctly.
General rules on deadlines and calculation of limitation periods
It will be possible to challenge the privatization of an apartment only taking into account the statute of limitations for claims. Limitation is governed by Chapter 12 and Art. 181 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. The claim period is calculated as follows:
- void transactions – 3 years;
- voidable transactions – 1 year;
- for the party to the transaction, the period runs from the date of registration of the right;
- for other persons - from the date when they learned about the illegality of the transaction and who the proper defendant is;
- the maximum limitation period does not exceed 10 years from the date of registration of the right.
To challenge the illegal privatization of an apartment, you need to decide on the following:
- What grounds to refer to – nullity or voidability.
- From what moment does the period begin to run?
We recently talked about the statute of limitations for claims related to real estate, and provided a convenient summary table of the grounds. This article can be used as a supplementary article.
ATTENTION! The starting point of the deadline will be the date of registration of ownership of the apartment. No more than 10 years should pass from this moment. The deadline is preclusive. If you file a lawsuit outside of it, the chances of winning tend to zero.
Peculiarities of timing during privatization
The most common grounds for challenging the privatization of an apartment are presented below.
| Factual basis | Legal basis | Statute of limitations |
| The person did not participate, although he was registered in the apartment. The court will definitely look at whether the citizen actually moved in, whether he lived in the apartment | Part 2 art. 168 Civil Code of the Russian Federation | 3 years Insignificance |
| The rights of minors whose parents did not include in the apartment transfer agreement were violated | ||
| The person participated in the procedure again, although he did not have such a right | ||
| Transfer of an apartment using forged documents | ||
| The person signed the waiver under the influence of threats, misconception or violence. This is often referred to by plaintiffs who were minors between the ages of 14 and 18, who themselves signed a waiver under the influence of their parents |
Art. 178 and 179 Civil Code of the Russian Federation | 1 year Contestability |
| The man did not understand the meaning of his actions, refusing privatization, although in general he is mentally healthy | Art. 177 Civil Code of the Russian Federation |
The plaintiff may be a participant in the transaction (new owner and administration) or a third party:
- guardianship authority if the rights of minors are violated;
- a person who did not participate in the privatization of housing, although he should have;
- a citizen who signed a refusal under the influence of threats, violence or delusion.
For everyone, there are different starting points for the return of the apartment to the state (municipality).
| Transaction side | Example | Beginning of the limitation period |
| Transaction participant | New home owner
|
From the date of state registration of the rights of the new owner of BTI, Unified State Register, Unified State Register of Real Estate |
| Third party | Former minor who was not included in the contract Refusal who did not understand the meaning of his refusal Guardianship and Trusteeship Authority |
From the day when the person learned or should have known about the privatization that took place |
Representatives can act on behalf of participants on the basis of a notarized power of attorney.
Attention! The wording “knew or should have known” is quite vague. Refuseniks need to remember that the court most often calculates the claim period from the moment the procedure is completed, even if the person was a minor at the time of signing the waiver.
Judicial practice for minors
A significant part of real court cases is occupied by proceedings on claims of citizens who were minors at the time of privatization.
The transaction is asked to be canceled when:
- a minor signed a waiver of privatization at the instruction of his parents, not realizing that he was giving up property - they cite a misconception;
- the child was simply not included in the privatization, he was registered in the apartment, but was not included in the social tenancy agreement by the employer - a reference to a violation of the law under Part 2 of Art. 168 Civil Code of the Russian Federation.
There is an opinion that the statute of limitations for minors is calculated from the moment they reach 18 years of age. This is a gross mistake - there is confusion with the legislation on alimony.
The period of claim for minors is calculated from the moment when the child learned or should have learned about privatization. A striking example is a 16-year-old teenager who signed a waiver.
The court recognizes that such a teenager could clearly and in detail understand the consequences of his refusal, which means that the limitation period for him began from the date of completion of the privatization of the apartment (for example, the Determination of the Penza Regional Court of October 9, 2012, case No. 33-2397).
If a citizen learns that his rights were violated as a child, the claim period for protection should be tied precisely to the moment of receiving the information, and not to the date of majority. This position is also shared by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation (see, for example, Review of the judicial practice of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation for the third quarter of 2008, dated December 5, 2008).
For example, if a child did not write a refusal, he could find out about privatization many years later, having received this living space as an inheritance from a deceased parent. The limitation period will begin from the moment of issuance of the inheritance certificate (but not more than 10 years from the date of privatization) - as mentioned by the Supreme Court in the Review presented above.
The problem with this approach is serious. Children, even older teenagers, find it difficult to adequately assess that their rights are being violated. Parents can abuse this position by excluding their children from participating in the privatization of the apartment. Despite this, judicial practice follows the path indicated above.
Statement of claim – download
To file a claim, you need to decide:
- with the requirement that the plaintiff asks the court for;
- and laws that need to be referred to.
When preparing an application, you need to take into account exactly what legal norms were in force at the time of privatization of the apartment. The court will examine the law under which privatization took place, even it has already lost force.
Download an example of a statement of claim to cancel privatization.
If the defendant claims that the statute of limitations has applied, you will need an application to reinstate the missed period. It can be downloaded for free here.
Attention! The court will restore the statute of limitations if there are valid circumstances for missing it that arose in the last six months.
In order to correctly calculate the statute of limitations for the privatization of an apartment, you need to decide on the requirement (1 or 3 years) and the start date of this period. In this case, you need to focus on the 10-year limitation period, after which it is almost impossible to cancel privatization.
- Any questions about calculating deadlines and drawing up documents can be asked to our on-duty lawyer via chat.
- Leave a like and repost the article so as not to lose useful information!
- You may also be interested in step-by-step instructions for privatizing an apartment.
How to challenge, cancel or change the terms of privatization of an apartment according to the statute of limitations?
The statute of limitations for the privatization of an apartment must be taken into account if the question of challenging or changing the terms of the transaction arises. In this case, the rules on recognizing transactions or their individual provisions as invalid, which are enshrined in the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, must be applied.
What it is
The essence of privatization transactions is the re-registration of rights to residential real estate (apartments or rooms) into the ownership of citizens. The conditions and procedure for this procedure are regulated by Law of the Russian Federation No. 1541-1, and the basic principles of the privatization program include:
- universal accessibility - every citizen living in an apartment on social rent has the right to apply for the transfer of housing into his ownership;
- one-time use - the opportunity to participate in the privatization program is provided to each citizen only once, and repeated applications for re-registration of rights to an apartment are available only to minors;
- gratuitousness - legislative acts do not provide for payment of the cost of real estate transferred into the ownership of citizens.
As a result of privatization transactions, the interests of all citizens who have the right to permanent use of housing are affected. In addition, in some cases, citizens who do not actually live in the apartment will have the right to re-register real estate (for example, those sentenced to serve a long prison sentence).
Based on the features of the privatization program, the following most pressing causes of disputes can be identified:
- unlawful exclusion of a certain circle of persons from the number of owners of residential premises (for example, non-inclusion in the list of owners of citizens who have not lost the right to use housing);
- violation of the rights of minors, i.e. failure to include them in the application for re-registration of rights;
- identifying cases of unreliability of information provided by citizens when applying for privatization;
- establishing facts of repeated application for participation in the privatization program;
- transfer to the ownership of citizens of a property excluded from privatization under Law No. 1541-1.
Based on the listed situations, various grounds will be established for challenging privatization, and in some cases it is allowed to change the terms of the privatization agreement forcibly.
Challenging privatization transactions is carried out only in court, and the right to go to court may arise for any entities whose rights are violated by the illegal transfer of housing into the ownership of citizens.
Dispute Rules
The privatization procedure is recognized as a gratuitous civil transaction, therefore all conditions and principles of contestation will apply to it in full. First of all, this concerns the recognition of the invalidity of a transaction or part of it. The general grounds for filing claims for the invalidity of a transaction are as follows:
- a significant violation of the norms of legislative acts, as a result of which the rights and interests of citizens, as well as state and municipal bodies are infringed;
- execution of a privatization transaction by a person who does not have the appropriate authority;
- conclusion of a privatization agreement by a citizen recognized in court as incompetent or partially capable;
- completion of a transaction as a result of deception or abuse of trust, as well as under the influence of violence or the threat of its use;
- other grounds recorded in the norms of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation.
In each of the listed cases, the right to go to court may arise among various interested parties - other tenants of the residential premises (for example, family members), municipal authorities, guardianship authorities (if the rights of a minor citizen are violated), etc.
Proving the facts to challenge privatization is the responsibility of the person making such a claim. For this purpose, various written evidence can be used - forms, forms, certificates, judicial acts. Based on them, the interested party must confirm the violation of his rights and demand the cancellation or modification of the terms of the privatization transaction.
Here's what you need to consider when going to court to challenge a privatization agreement:
- Only a person whose rights are directly violated by the privatization transaction can file a claim in court: other employers illegally excluded from the list of owners; municipal authorities that have lost ownership of an apartment as a result of illegal actions; the prosecutor's office or guardianship authorities, designed to protect the legitimate interests of certain categories of citizens;
- consideration of these disputes falls within the competence of courts of general jurisdiction (district or city courts);
- to go to court with a demand to cancel or change the terms of a privatization transaction, there is no need to follow the claims procedure;
- when considering a case, all interested parties whose interests may be affected by the invalidation of privatization are involved in the process;
- To file a claim, it is necessary to comply with the procedural limitation periods regulated by civil law.
Determining the possibility of considering the dispute on the merits will depend on whether the plaintiff has complied with the statute of limitations, and whether other participants in the process have made a demand to skip it. Let's consider the legal basis for resolving these issues.
Statute of limitations
To recognize transactions as invalid, special rules have been established for determining statutes of limitations. They depend on the nullity or voidability of these transactions and are:
- three years for transactions that are recognized by law as void (in this case, the claim will also include the application of the consequences of the invalidity of the transaction);
- one year for transactions that qualify as voidable.
Based on the content of privatization agreements, the illegal deprivation of individual citizens of the right to ownership of living space will be a violation of their legitimate interests. According to Article 168 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, this allows the privatization transaction to be classified as void, and the statute of limitations for challenging it will be three years.
The moment when the specified period begins is of key importance. To determine this, you need to use the provisions of Article 181 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation:
- as a general rule, the three-year period will begin to run from the moment when the actual execution of the privatization transaction began - this date will be the day of entry into the state register of the Unified State Register of Real Estate (USRN) of the entry on the emergence of property rights among citizens;
- if claims are made by a person who was not one of the participants in the privatization agreement, the three-year period for going to court begins to run from the day when such a citizen learned or should have learned about the start of execution of the transaction;
- under any circumstances, the deadline for filing a lawsuit to challenge a transaction cannot exceed ten years.
Thus, the law establishes a sufficient period for judicial protection of the interests of citizens whose rights were violated by an illegal transaction. The statute of limitations applies in a similar manner if the plaintiff is the municipal owner of the housing stock or the guardianship authorities.
Nuances of applying the statute of limitations
If a claim is filed within the regulated limitation period, it is subject to consideration on its merits with the issuance of a judicial act. Various legal nuances may arise when establishing a three-year deadline for going to court:
- if the court has determined that the statement of claim to challenge the results of privatization was received outside the three-year period, it does not have the right to refuse the citizen to consider the case and terminate the proceedings at its own discretion;
- if the three-year deadline for filing legal claims has been missed and any of the participants in the process declared this fact during the court hearing, the statement of claim is left without consideration and the proceedings are terminated;
- the possibility of extending the limitation period is allowed only if there are good reasons for missing it; the court will evaluate these arguments according to its own conviction based on the evidence presented.
Thus, if a statement of claim is filed with the court after three years from the date the right to challenge arose, but none of the participants in the process declared this fact, the case will be considered on its merits on a general basis.
How to correctly determine the beginning of the period? If a citizen was excluded from the list of owners during privatization, he may not find out about this fact for a long time.
For example, while serving a real prison sentence, citizens are objectively deprived of the opportunity to receive reliable information about any actions with their apartment. In this case, he will be able to learn about privatization only from the moment of release from prison.
Under such circumstances, if a dispute arises about the limitation period, the plaintiff will have to prove the moment when he had the opportunity to learn about the violation of his right.
Restoration of the limitation period occurs only in court; for this, the interested person must submit a corresponding application or petition. At the same time, the court is presented with a complete set of documents confirming the validity of the late application for protection of one’s interests.
Based on the analysis of judicial practice, the grounds for reinstating the limitation period will be:
- the plaintiff’s prolonged illness, during which he was deprived of the opportunity to go to court (for example, a long stay in hospital);
- staying on a long business trip outside the region or country;
- being in prison to serve a sentence under a criminal sentence;
- serving in the ranks of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation or other similar formations.
The court may recognize other reasons for missing a deadline as valid. For this purpose, the submitted documents, forms and certificates will be examined at the court hearing. When considering an application for restoration of the deadline, all interested parties are involved in the case and are given the right to raise objections to the stated request.
If the statute of limitations is restored by the court , the case will be considered according to the general rules and will end with a court verdict. The consequences of challenging privatization transactions may include:
- termination of the contract and return of the parties to their original state - the apartment will again become municipal property, and citizens will acquire the status of tenants;
- changing the contract by including new owners and redistributing shares;
- changing the contract by excluding individuals from it and correspondingly distributing shares among the remaining owners.
The issued judicial act will be the basis for contacting the Rosreestr service and carrying out registration actions. If the transaction is declared invalid, employers do not lose the right to re-apply for privatization, and all mandatory procedures will be carried out on a general basis in accordance with Law No. 1541-1.
Invalidation of privatization 2023 - contracts, judicial practice, statute of limitations, sample claim, consequences
In order to declare a real estate privatization transaction invalid, it is necessary to contact the judicial authority with the appropriate statement of claim.
In order to minimize the risks of receiving a refusal from the court, you need to know about some important nuances.
Invalid transaction
To be able to cancel privatization, it is necessary to prove the invalidity of the transaction. These include all transactions without exception that are contrary to Russian legislation.
The legislation of the Russian Federation provides for several types of such transactions:
- Insignificant. In other words, the transaction is declared invalid from the period of its completion, regardless of whether the fact was revealed or not.
- Contestable. The fact of invalidity is determined by a judicial authority at the request of someone.
The only difference is that insignificant privatization is considered such under Russian law. In the second situation, the final word remains with the judiciary.
Speaking about the consequences that apply to invalid transactions, after this fact has been established by the judicial authority, in most cases restitution is used - the return of relations to the situation before the initiation of the procedure.
In such a situation, the procedure, without exception, is subject to return to the previous owners, namely:
- property;
- cash and so on.
Often everything is returned to only one party or is completely subject to confiscation in favor of the state.
However, this is only possible when the transaction has very dangerous consequences for society. The possibility of monetary compensation is also allowed if it is revealed that damage has been caused to one of the parties.
The legislative framework
The main legislative acts on the issue under consideration are considered to be:
- Federal Law No. 1541-1, which displays the requirements for the possibility of taking part in the procedure.
- The Civil Code of the Russian Federation, which displays the rules for confirming privatization as invalid, also describes the consequences.
- Federal Law No. 218 - reflects the execution of the act of recognizing the investigation as invalid.
It is these legislative acts that must be emphasized in order to invalidate a transaction.
Invalidation of privatization
Recognizing privatization as invalid requires compliance with a certain mechanism of action and nuances. In order to be able to protect your rights, we will consider the mechanism in more detail.
Reasons
An agreement to transfer property into private hands can be declared invalid through a judicial authority only if:
- when it was signed, the rights of minor children and other citizens were violated;
- the citizens who signed the agreement were incompetent or minors for this period;
- citizens did not privatize property voluntarily, or became victims of fraudsters, were misled, and so on.
These conditions are grounds for invalidating privatization.
Presence of minor children
The participation of minor children in privatization is quite possible. Often, due to ignorance of Russian legislation, parents come to the conclusion that the procedure needs to be appealed to a judicial authority and declared invalid.
This is allowed in the following cases:
- minor children are excluded from the procedure without prior permission from the guardianship and trusteeship authorities;
- the contract bears the signature of a child under 14 years of age;
- the agreement was signed by children aged 14 to 18 years, but without prior parental permission.
Please note: actions directed against children regarding the issue of obtaining a share in an apartment at the place of residence are illegal, and this is grounds for invalidating the transaction.
In 2023, this rule also applies to citizens who, according to Russian law, are recognized as legally incompetent.
Repeated participation
Based on Russian legislation, the right to privatize any type of real estate can be used by adult citizens only once in their life.
Repeated participation is strictly prohibited.
Based on this, upon repeated participation, the transaction is considered void. Real estate obtained in this way must be returned to the state or municipality. The violation does not apply to those citizens who previously refused to take part in the transaction on their own initiative.
The period when you can use your right is limited only by the provisions of Russian legislation.
Incapacitated persons
Some mental illnesses can lead to the fact that relatives, in order to protect themselves from various actions of a person, ask the court to declare him incompetent.
All transactions without exception, including privatization, are considered void. From these types of transactions is the one that was carried out by an adult with limited legal capacity.
In most cases, this is done with those who suffer from alcohol or drug addiction.
Without exception, all legally significant transactions are subject to appeal, if permission to carry them out has not been obtained from the trustee.
Temporarily deregistered
Based on the Federal Law “On Privatization,” only citizens who are registered in the property at the time of privatization can take part in the procedure.
In addition to them, there is a list of citizens who have the right to privatization without the necessary registration:
- military citizens;
- persons who are in prison.
Due to their absence and deregistration on a temporary basis, the right to receive part of the real estate remains with them.
Misconception
It is very difficult to prove that the person who signed the agreement was in a state of delusion. This is due to the fact that Russian legislation considers only misconception regarding the subject of the transaction and its consequences to be significant. As for motives, they do not play a serious role.
You can often find another option when, under delusion, citizens, on the contrary, refuse to participate in the privatization procedure.
In this case, there are good chances to defend your position in the judiciary. If the judge finds the arguments convincing, a decision will be made to invalidate the agreement.
After appealing the transaction, the privatization procedure can be initiated.
Deception or threats
An additional basis for appealing the result of privatization is coercion to conclude such an agreement:
- by deception;
- as a result of violence, threat to property or life and health.
Despite the obvious illegal behavior of one of the parties, the transaction is not considered void, but directly voidable.
The party that is convinced that rights have been violated has the right to appeal its opinion to a judicial authority. Recognition of such a transaction as invalid has differences from other consequences.
A participant who threatens or deceives will not be able to get his property back. It should go to the benefit of the state.
Procedure
To be able to invalidate an agreement, a certain mechanism of action must be followed.
Initially, it is necessary to make sure that there was a violation of Russian legislation or someone else’s rights. This can be done by consulting with a qualified attorney.
Going to court
The second stage is to contact the judicial authority, since it is within its competence to confirm the legality or invalidity of the transaction and decide on the consequences that will be applicable.
This is especially true when it comes to voidable transactions, where only a court ruling matters.
Documentation
In addition to the statement of claim, you must additionally attach:
- passport + copies of completed pages of the claim;
- evidentiary documentation;
- a certificate regarding the presence of incapacity or limited abilities - if available;
- receipts confirming all expenses incurred;
- birth certificate of minor children - if available;
- a certificate from the Federal Migration Service confirming registration;
- title documents for living space.
Depending on each specific case, the list of documents may expand.
Sample claim
The statement of claim regarding the recognition of the agreement and the result of privatization as invalid must be prepared in writing.
The standard requirements of Russian legislation apply to it.
You can download a sample claim statement here.
Statute of limitations
Based on Article 196 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the limitation period is 3 years. If the plaintiff proves the impossibility of filing an application within the established period, the limitation period may be extended.
Legal consequences
The main consequences based on Chapter 9 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation are considered to be:
- forced termination of the transaction;
- return of each party to the initial stage of privatization;
- the property is returned to the rightful owner.
If the fact of damage to property or health was revealed, the party must pay monetary compensation.
Arbitrage practice
Judicial practice that has developed in such cases suggests that even in relations between one of the parties, which is the state, you can become a victim not only of exceeding obligations, but also of illegal actions in full.
The solution often adopted is deprivatization.
Here is presented judicial practice on invalidating a privatization agreement.
It is worth noting that, according to statistics, litigation on this issue is only increasing every year.
Video about the cancellation of the deal
Attention!
- Due to frequent changes in legislation, information sometimes becomes outdated faster than we can update it on the website.
- All cases are very individual and depend on many factors. Basic information does not guarantee a solution to your specific problems.
That's why FREE expert consultants work for you around the clock!
APPLICATIONS AND CALLS ARE ACCEPTED 24/7 and 7 days a week.
Is it possible to challenge the privatization of an apartment 2023 - the statute of limitations
Many citizens have long exercised the right to receive an apartment from the state.
But if a person receives an apartment not under a free use agreement, but under a social tenancy agreement, then he can count on privatization actions. What is this procedure?
What objects are subject to registration of ownership?
Privatization of a real estate property is the transfer of ownership rights from the state to a private person.
The transfer can be either an enterprise or an organization to a legal entity. For individuals it is possible to register a land plot.
The object for privatization can be a house, a dacha, an apartment. Most often, citizens apply for privatization of an apartment.
The current Federal Law is extended annually. After all, there are still citizens who have not taken advantage of the right to receive free services.
Enterprises, organizations, and factories are also subject to privatization. But such a promotion is available only to entrepreneurs and legal entities who own less than 25% of assets.
Who is eligible?
Any minor and capable person who is registered in the property under a social tenancy agreement can exercise this right.
If real estate is used on a free rental basis, then such an object is not subject to privatization actions.
A similar situation is observed in the case of the provision of real estate by the military and the employer. In the first case this is possible. But, as a rule, the Ministry of Defense refuses this action without giving a reason. And in this case, only judicial proceedings on the fact of the ban are available.
If a citizen refuses privatization actions, he must confirm this in writing.
If this is a minor, then such a desire is expressed by the parents and guardianship authorities. But at the same time, both persons do not lose the opportunity to receive free privatization in the future.
The reason for refusal may also be the already used right to privatization action.
The right can be exercised not only by an individual who does not own property, but also by an entrepreneur or legal entity. A mandatory condition for fulfillment is less than 25% of assets owned.
Normative base
The issue regarding privatization actions is regulated by Federal Law No. 1541-1 of 2023.
It stipulates:
- all terms of provision;
- ways to obtain the service;
- deadline for provision;
- price.
Additional legal acts such as the Civil and Administrative Code regulate the possibility of challenging the privatization of an apartment in 2023.
Is it possible to challenge the privatization of an apartment?
Privatization actions can be challenged in court. To do this, it is necessary to collect the entire evidence base, including the testimony of other citizens.
Often, infringement of the rights of other owners becomes a stumbling block when formalizing privatization.
Therefore, you need to independently study the legislative framework and act only within the framework of the law.
Reasons
To challenge an action, you must have compelling reasons. In particular, such as:
- registration of privatization with an incapacitated person or other citizen who does not have the authority to privatize;
- repeated right to receive privatization by a legally competent person;
- exclusion of a minor child without the right to receive a share and refusal in writing;
- illegal privatization;
- falsification of procedure documentation;
- incapacity of the parties to the transaction;
- identification of incorrect filling or non-existent facts;
- participants are misled.
Invalidation of a transaction
Many citizens want to know whether it is possible to challenge the privatization of an apartment. Yes, such a possibility exists, but in accordance with current legislation, only through the court.
To complete the procedure you will need to provide:
- full package of documents;
- application of the established form.
Going to court
Before filing a claim, you need to decide on the type in advance. It is necessary to familiarize yourself with the current legislation and accurately determine the insignificance of a transaction from invalid. The latter fact is established by the court independently.
A document may be invalidated if there are interests of another owner.
A transaction can be declared invalid without a court decision. A power of attorney of this type becomes void by virtue of its execution.
Once the applicant has determined the claim, the following documentation must be provided:
- statement of claim of the established form;
- supporting documents that the son-in-law needs to take into account when reviewing the contract.
Additionally, you must provide a receipt confirming payment of the state fee.
Sample claim
The statement of claim has standard details:
- name of the court;
- parties to the lawsuit;
- amount of claims;
- the name of the document itself;
- introductory part, which briefly summarizes the information;
- motivation;
- request for recognition or monetary compensation;
- Attached documents;
- signature, date of compilation.
A sample statement of claim to invalidate privatization is here.
What could be the solution?
The court's decision may either declare the contract invalid or void. You need to remember these two concepts and know how they differ.
A gratuitous transfer of title may be void under applicable law or a court order.
To be declared void, legitimate interests must be satisfied and the fact of violation must be established. Consequences of this type may occur when listening to public interests or on the initiative of the court.
Statute of limitations
The limitation period is governed by Article 181 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. It is legally possible to file a claim of this type within a year.
The statute of limitations for a void or invalid transaction is 2 years.
The court has the right to increase the time limit if the reasons for the absence of a claim are valid.
Legal consequences
If the contract is declared invalid, the following legal consequences occur:
- the agreement is not accompanied by legal consequences;
- the citizen who reported the consequences was not present at the conclusion of the privatization.
That is, here the property is returned to its original state.
Arbitrage practice
- Despite the large number of similar situations, it is impossible to say with certainty about challenging the procedure.
- It is possible to transfer property to a private person free of charge.
- But an agreement can only be invalidated in practice without the consent of the remaining persons registered in the property.
- Also, practice shows that it is possible to challenge it if the procedure for transferring a property to a private person is not followed.
Here is presented judicial practice on recognizing the illegal privatization of an apartment.
Video about the procedure for challenging a transaction
Attention!
- Due to frequent changes in legislation, information sometimes becomes outdated faster than we can update it on the website.
- All cases are very individual and depend on many factors. Basic information does not guarantee a solution to your specific problems.
That's why FREE expert consultants work for you around the clock!
APPLICATIONS AND CALLS ARE ACCEPTED 24/7 and 7 days a week.
Do I have the right to challenge the privatization of an apartment after reaching 18 years of age?
Do I have the right, after reaching 18 years of age, to challenge the privatization of residential premises in 1993 on the grounds that my parents, as a minor, did not include me in the privatization? Is it true that in 1993 children could not have been included in privatization?
Answer:
to challenge the privatization (transaction) in your case. This legal position was expressed by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in its latest review of legislation and judicial practice.
In particular, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation clarified that the statute of limitations should still be calculated from the moment when the person learned that he was not included in the number of owners of the privatized residential premises, and not from the moment the transaction began.
At the same time, the RF Supreme Court, for obvious reasons, did not evaluate the disputed transaction. Meanwhile, the transaction is not contestable, it is void as if it was made in violation of the law, which means that the plaintiff missed the three-year limitation period.
However, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation was not embarrassed by these circumstances. It seems that judicial practice will now follow the path indicated in the Determination in case No. 56-B08-10.
So, here's what we're talking about (from the review of legislation and judicial practice of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation for the third quarter of 2008 (approved by the Resolution of the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated December 5, 2008):
«Refusal to satisfy a claim to recognize a residential privatization agreement as partially invalid due to the applicant missing the deadline for filing a lawsuit was declared illegal.
A. appealed to the court with demands to partially invalidate the privatization agreement for residential premises, the registration certificate and the certificate of the right to inheritance by law, citing the fact that in February 1994 her parents B. and K. privatized the apartment they occupied. At the time of conclusion of the contract A.
(plaintiff), born in 1976, and her brother (involved in the case as a third party), born in 1977, being minors, in violation of the requirements of the law, were not included in the list of owners of the privatized residential premises, and therefore A.
asked to include her among the owners of the disputed residential premises, to partially invalidate the registration certificate dated March 15, 1994 on the registration of ownership of the disputed apartment for B. and K. and the certificate of inheritance according to the law of February 6, 2007.
in terms of indicating in it the ownership of the deceased on July 26, 2006 B. 1/2 share in the right of common shared ownership of the specified apartment.
Defendant K. did not admit the claims, explaining that the claims should be rejected due to the expiration of the statute of limitations, since the daughter knew from the moment of privatization of the apartment that she was not included in the number of owners of the residential premises.
- The decision of the district court satisfied the claim in full.
- By the ruling of the cassation court, the decision of the district court was canceled and a new decision was made in the case, which rejected the claims due to the plaintiff missing the deadline for filing a lawsuit.
- The Judicial Collegium for Civil Cases of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation overturned the ruling of the cassation court, upholding the decision of the district court on the following grounds.
As can be seen from the case materials and established by the court of first instance, A. appealed to the court with a demand to recognize the privatization agreement for the disputed apartment dated February 23, 1994 as invalid in terms of its non-inclusion among the owners of the privatized housing. Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in paragraph 6 of the resolution of August 24, 1993
No. 8 (with subsequent amendments and additions) “On some issues of application by courts of the Law of the Russian Federation “On the privatization of housing stock in the Russian Federation” explained that an agreement, as well as a certificate of ownership, at the request of interested parties, can be declared invalid by the court on the grounds established by civil law to invalidate a transaction.
In resolving the dispute and satisfying the stated demands, the court of first instance reasonably proceeded from the fact that the limitation period, defined in paragraph 2 of Art. 181 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, in this case should be calculated in accordance with paragraph 1 of Art.
200 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation from the day when the person learned or should have learned about the violation of his right. As established in the case, the plaintiff learned that she was not included in the list of owners after the issuance of a certificate of the right to inheritance by law after the death of B.’s father, namely on July 26, 2006.
She went to court in February 2007, that is, within a one-year period.
Taking into account the above, the cassation court did not have the grounds provided for by law to make a new decision to reject the claim” (extract from the ruling of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in case No. 56-B08-10).
However, we will give our point of view on this issue.
The Law “On the Privatization of Housing Stock in the Russian Federation” did not always contain a provision on the mandatory inclusion in the contract of the gratuitous transfer of housing into the ownership of minors, but such a provision was in another law. In 1993, there was Article 133 of the Code of the Russian Federation, which prohibited the renunciation of rights belonging to minors without the permission of the guardianship and trusteeship authorities.
In addition, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation drew attention to this in Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of August 24, 1993 No. 8, which stated:
“... Since minors living with the employer and being members of his family or former family members, according to Art.
53 of the Housing Code of the RSFSR have equal rights arising from the lease agreement; in the event of free privatization of the occupied premises, they, on an equal basis with adult users, have the right to become participants in the common ownership of this premises. Considering that in accordance with Art.
133 CoBS of the RSFSR, the guardian does not have the right, without the prior permission of the guardianship and trusteeship authorities, to make transactions that go beyond everyday life, in particular, renunciation of the rights belonging to the ward, and the trustee to give consent to such transactions; refusal to participate in privatization can be carried out by parents and adoptive parents minors, as well as their guardians and trustees only with permission from the above authorities.”
It is clear that those parents who privatized the occupied residential premises without including children in the contract did not receive the consent of the guardianship authorities (in practice, the guardianship will never give such consent).
Thus, all transactions for the gratuitous transfer of residential premises into the ownership of citizens (privatization), concluded without including in the contract children who actually occupy this residential premises or have the right to use it on an equal basis with their parents, are invalid transactions.
Regarding the question of the possibility of challenging the transaction (privatization), then, alas, the statute of limitations has expired (15 years have passed), which is equal to three years and is calculated from the moment the transaction begins.
The fact that the author of the question did not have the opportunity to go to court before reaching the age of 18 does not matter; this should have been done by his parents, who are the legal representatives.
The dishonesty of parents is not a basis for reinstating the statute of limitations for filing a claim in court for a child who has reached 18 years of age.
So, the statute of limitations for applying the consequences of invalidity of a privatization transaction is three years. And this period is calculated not from the moment of reaching 18 years of age, and not from the moment when the author learned about the violation of his rights, but from the moment of signing the disputed agreement.
It seems a more legal and logical position according to which a child who is not included in the contract of gratuitous transfer of ownership, upon reaching 18 years of age, has the right to file a claim against legal representatives (that is, his parents) for compensation for damage caused to him by the parent’s illegal refusal of the child’s rights for the privatization of residential premises. However, we have not yet encountered such judicial practice, given the specifics of the “parent-child” relationship, it seems that it is unlikely to occur in the future. It is also worth recalling that missing the three-year limitation period is not grounds for refusal to accept the statement of claim by the court, but the defendant’s statement in court about missing such a period will lead to refusal to satisfy the claim.
But, let us repeat, the above position, according to which the period for challenging a privatization transaction begins from the moment its execution begins, is not reflected in the practice of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, and therefore we must proceed from the fact that the limitation period, defined in paragraph 2 of Art. 181 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, in this case should be calculated in accordance with paragraph 1 of Art. 200 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation from the day when the person learned or should have learned about the violation of his right.
See also on the topic: Challenging a residential privatization agreement by minors
Return to the beginning of the practice review: Privatization of an apartment, house, room. Judicial practice, court decisions
Loading...
