Comment to Article 251. Foreclosure on the property of the proprietor of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan
The new version of paragraph 1 of the commented article additionally restricts the possibility of extrajudicial foreclosure on the property of the owner. Exceptions to the judicial procedure cannot now be established by legislative acts, as it was before.
The rule of the commented article is one of the two cases (except for the confiscation of Art. 254 of the Civil Code) when property is seized from the owner against his will without any compensation. This directly follows from a number of provisions of the Civil Code, which allow creditors to foreclose on the property of the owner for his obligations (paragraph 1 of Article 20 of the Civil Code, paragraph 1 of Article 44 of the Civil Code, Article 207 of the Civil Code). At the same time, the Civil Code contains some restrictions on the seizure of property under the obligations of the owner (for example, paragraph 2 of art. 20 of the Civil Code).
A contract, in particular a pledge agreement (Clause 2 of Article 318 of the Civil Code), may grant the right to the other party to foreclose on the property of the owner for his obligations out of court.
Constitution Law Code Standard Decree Order Decision Resolution Lawyer Almaty Lawyer Legal service Legal advice Civil Criminal Administrative cases Disputes Defense Arbitration Law Company Kazakhstan Law Firm Court Cases
The commentary was prepared within the framework of the scientific and practical research program of the Scientific Research Center of Private Law of the Kazakh State Law University.
Head of the working group on the preparation of the draft Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, Corresponding Member of the Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Kazakhstan, Professor Suleimenov M.K.
Deputy head Professor Basin Yu.G.
