LEXI - AI Legal Assistant
Sorry, there was an error communicating with our API.
Try refreshing the page, and if the error persists, please try again in a few minutes.
VELMISKINA v. RUSSIA and 11 other applications
Doc ref: 44832/17, 22537/18, 23836/18, 3864/19, 3866/19, 22122/20, 27319/20, 38579/20, 53091/20, 3450/21, 964... • ECHR ID: 001-213181
Document date: October 19, 2021
- Inbound citations: 0
- •
- Cited paragraphs: 0
- •
- Outbound citations: 7
VELMISKINA v. RUSSIA and 11 other applications
Doc ref: 44832/17, 22537/18, 23836/18, 3864/19, 3866/19, 22122/20, 27319/20, 38579/20, 53091/20, 3450/21, 964... • ECHR ID: 001-213181
Document date: October 19, 2021
Cited paragraphs only
Published on 8 November 2021
THIRD SECTION
Application no. 44832/17 Galina Mikhaylovna VELMISKINA against Russia and 11 other applications (see list appended) communicated on 19 October 2021
SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE
The present cases concern an allegedly disproportionate interference with the property rights of the applicants ( bona fide buyers) on account of the annulment without compensation of their titles to the plots of land acquired from other private parties and registered in the Consolidated State Register of Real Estate Titles and Transactions (more details are summarised in the Appendix) . The annulment was the result of rei vindicatio claims brought by the authorities against the applicants and based on various irregularities in the initial privatisations not imputable to them. The courts rejected the applicants’ bona fide plea on the ground that the land plots left the possession of the State (or, where applicable, of the municipality) against its will (compare with Gladysheva v. Russia , no. 7097/10, §§ 77-82, 6 December 2011; for a recent example related to the plots of land see Seregin and Others v. Russia , nos. 31686/16 and 4 others, §§ 94-111, with further references, 16 March 2021).
QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES
Common questions
1. Was the interference with the applicants’ property rights in conformity with the requirements of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1?
In particular:
(a) Was the interference “subject to the conditions provided for by law”? Was the domestic courts’ interpretation of Articles 196, 200 and 302 of the Civil Code in the applicants’ cases, insofar as it allowed the authorities to reclaim the real estate property from the private persons irrespective of their good faith and without any form of redress, “foreseeable”?
(b) Did the interference serve a legitimate public (or general) interest, within the meaning of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention?
(c) Did the interference strike a fair balance between the demands of the general interest and the interests of the applicants within the meaning of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (see, mutatis mutandis, Seregin and Others v. Russia , nos. 31686/16 and 4 others, §§ 94-111, with further references 16 March )? In particular:
(i) Did the authorities act in good time and in an appropriate and consistent manner (see, mutatis mutandis , Muharrem Güneş and Others v. Turkey , no. 23060/08, § 75, 24 November 2020; Semenov v. Russia , no. 17254/15, §§ 60-64, 16 March 2021)?
(ii) Did the applicants act as bona fide buyers, in the light of the principles developed by the Court in its case-law (see Muharrem GüneÅŸ and Others, cited above, § 80; Seregin and Others , cited above, §§ 108 ‑ 109, and compare and contrast with Belova v. Russia , no. 33955/08, §§ 40-41, 15 September 2020) as well as taking into account the criteria set forth in Joint Ruling of the Plenary of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and the Plenary of the High Commercial Court of the Russian Federation of 29 April 2010 no. 10/22 (see Seregin and Others , cited above, § 64)?
2. The parties are requested to submit information on whether the related judgments have been executed, dates of their execution and the current status of the land plots.
Case-specific question
3. In respect of application no. 27319/20, did the recognition of the applicant’s house erected on the plot of land in question as an unauthorised construction notwithstanding the existence of a valid construction permit and other authorisations delivered by the authorities, strike a fair balance between the demands of general interest and the interests of the applicant within the meaning of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (see, mutatis mutandis , Tumeliai v. Lithuania , no. 25545/14, §§ 77-81, 9 January 2018)?
APPENDIX
No.
Application number
Case title
Introduction date
Applicant
Year of Birth
Place of Residence
Represented by
Type of land ( категория и назначение участка) , first transaction - acquiring by the Applicant – date of State registration of title (dates)
Situation of the land (region), number of land plots, size, price of acquisition by the Applicant
Rei vindicatio claim:
who and when
Final decision (the Supreme Court of Russia as second cassation)
Related criminal proceedings (if any)/ other reasons for annulment of the title
1
44832/17
Velmiskina v. Russia
19/06/2017
Galina Mikhaylovna VELMISKINA 1960 Sochi, Krasnodar region
Ilyas Salimovich VAKHITOV
Land for agricultural use ( земли сельскохозяйственного назначения ) for gardening ( для садоводства )
2007 - 20/01/2011 – 10/02/2011
Krasnodar Region
1 plot
560 m2
100,000 RUB
Municipality of Sochi
2016
10/01/2017
Conviction of third persons for aggravated fraud with land plots by Lazarevskiy District Court of Sochi effective on 19/11/2014
2
22537/18
Petrova v. Russia
29/04/2018
Nadezhda Anatolyevna PETROVA 1975 St Petersburg
Maksim Yuryevich RUTSKIY
Urban land ( земли населенных пунктов ) for private housing construction ( для индивидуального жилищного строительства )
2009 - 12/02/2010 – 05/03/2010
Leningrad Region
2 plots 1,200 m2 each 100,000 RUB each
Prosecutor’s Office of Priozersk, Leningrad Region
2016
01/11/2017
Criminal proceedings in respect of third person for fraud with land plots discontinued on 21/11/2015 as time-barred
3
23836/18
Arutyunyan v. Russia
26/04/2018
Suren Sergeyevich ARUTYUNYAN 1959 Kazan
MEMORIAL HUMAN RIGHTS CENTRE
Urban land for private farm household ( для личного подсобного хозяйства )
2008 - 04/08/2009 – 25/08/2009
Republic of Tatarstan
1 plot
3,034 m2
1,000,000 RUB
Committee for City Property and Land Management of Executive Committee of Kazan
2016
26/10/2017
Criminal proceedings in respect of third persons, including the applicant’s seller for forgery of documents discontinued on 08/01/2015 as time-barred
4
3864/19
Uvarova v Russia
09/01/2019
Larisa Dmitriyevna UVAROVA
1973Voronezh
Urban land for private housing construction
03/06/2014 – 22/07/2014 – 31/07/2014
Voronezh Region
1 plot
800 m2
2,300,000 RUB
Department for Land and Property Relations of Voronezh Region
2017
13/08/2018
Forgery of the court decision establishing the rights of the first owner; criminal proceedings in respect of unidentified persons for aggravated fraud with unknown outcome
5
3866/19
Nebolsina v. Russia
09/01/2019
Olga Aleksandrovna NEBOLSINA
1968Voronezh
Urban land for private housing construction
23/05/2014 – 01/07/2014 – 18/07/2014
Ibidem
Ibidem
17/08/2018
Quashing in 2017, following the request of Department for Land and Property Relations of Voronezh Region, of the judgment establishing the rights of the applicant’s seller; criminal proceedings in respect of unidentified persons for aggravated fraud with unknown outcome
6
22122/20
Salakhovy v. Russia
04/05/2020
Leysan Kamilevna SALAKHOVA 1983 Kazan Eduard Ildusovich SALAKHOV 1984 Kazan
Urban land for private housing construction
2016 –05/12/2017, 24/08/2017 -15/01/2018
Republic of Tatarstan
2 plots
1373 m2 3,800,000 RUB
991 m2 2,300,000 RUB
Committee for City Property and Land Management of Executive Committee of Kazan
2018
26/11/2019 and 29/11/2019
No criminal proceedings, lack of relevant information in the archives
7
27319/20
Goyzenband v. Russia
14/05/2020
Aleksandr Arkadyevich GOYZENBAND 1980 Nizhniy Novgorod
Urban land for private housing construction
05/08/2015 – 21/08/2015 – 25/08/2015
Nizhny Novgorod Region
1 plot
906 m2
1,750,000 RUB
Ministry of Property and Land Relations of Nizhny Novgorod Region
2018
14/02/2020
Conviction of the applicant’s seller for aggravated fraud with land plots by the Sormovskiy District Court of Nizhny Novgorod of 30/11/2017
8
38579/20
Shulga v. Russia
30/06/2020
Andrey Aleksandrovich SHULGA 1968 Sochi, Krasnodar region
Land for agricultural use, for gardening
2008 - 15/04/2017 – 25/04/2017
Krasnodar Region
1 plot
700 m2
970,000 RUB
Municipality of Sochi
2018
15/04/2020
Conviction of third persons including the applicant’s seller for aggravated fraud with land plots by the Khostinskiy District Court of Sochi of 09/01/2018; the criminal proceedings in respect of the seller discontinued owing to his death
9
53091/20
Shayakhmetov v. Russia
09/11/2020
Radik Dzhaudatovich SHAYAKHMETOV 1978 Kazan
Urban land for private house ( под индивидуальный жилой дом )
30/06/2017 – 26/10/2018 – 02/11/2018
Republic of Tatarstan
1 plot
1,256 m2
1,000,000 RUB
Committee for City Property and Land Management of Executive Committee of Kazan
2019
16/07/2020
No criminal proceedings, lack of relevant information in the archives
10
3450/21
Zhidkova v. Russia
20/12/2020
Irina Viktorovna ZHIDKOVA 1971 Moscow
Andrey Anatolyevich NAZAROV
Urban land for private farm household
21/08/2017 – 08/09/2017 – 19/09/2017
Moscow Region
1 plot
470 m2
999,000 RUB
Municipal Institution “Municipality of Voskresenskiy Municipal District of Moscow Region”
2018
20/03/2020
No criminal proceedings; quashing of the judgment recognising the property rights of the applicant’s seller to the plot owing to newly-discovered circumstances; the domestic courts in addition referred to the applicant’s lack of diligence since she should have realised the deficiencies of the domestic judgment establishing the ownership of the seller
11
9647/21
Obraztsova v. Russia
21/01/2021
Nadezhda Ivanovna OBRAZTSOVA 1954 Snegiri, Moscow Region
Urban land for private housing construction
2010 – 10/08/2013 – 28/08/2013
Moscow Region
1 plot
2,000 m2
300,000 RUB
Municipality of the Urban District Istra, 2018
02/10/2020
Conviction of third persons for aggravated fraud with land plots by Istra Town Court of Moscow Region of 06/03/2017
12
17136/21
Guseva v. Russia
25/03/2021
Tatyana Aleksandrovna GUSEVA 1983 St Petersburg
Artem Aleksandrovich RASSOKHIN
Urban land for private housing construction
14/11/2017 – 18/11/2017 – 28/11/2017
Leningrad Region
1 plot
1,200 m2
700,000 RUB
Prosecutor of Tosno Town of Leningrad Region
2019
08/10/2020
Civil proceedings for annulment of the applicant’s title establishing that his seller’s title was based on forged documents
© European Union,
https://eur-lex.europa.eu, 1998 - 2025
