Lawyer for civil disputes Evidence and proof

In accordance with Article 149 of the CPC, in order to confirm the circumstances on which claims against immovable property are based, the plaintiff should first provide a certificate of registered rights to this property. According to the information provided by the certificate of registered rights to immovable property, it is possible to determine whether the property has an owner or not, and depending on this, determine the appropriate defendant. If there are no property rights in the legal cadastre, the courts should find out when the immovable property was built in order to establish (exclude) the fact of unauthorized construction. In some cases, the absence of state registration for real estate means that it is state-owned. Along with this, the documents confirming the plaintiff's arguments may include: title and identification documents for the object; documents on the payment of taxes and other payments related to the maintenance of the property; acts on the technical condition of the property at the time of acquisition.; evidence of the transfer of property to the plaintiff; property valuation reports; other evidence confirming the good faith and prescription of ownership, including a reference to witness testimony. For example, the Tulkubassky district Court of the South Kazakhstan region reasonably denied B.'s claim for recognition of ownership of the apartment due to the statute of limitations, since the plaintiff did not provide evidence of ownership: the plaintiff is registered at a different address; there are no receipts for payment of taxes or utilities on his behalf.; there are only certificates of absence of utility bills at the time of filing the claim. At the same time, the generalization showed that in judicial practice there are cases when a claim for recognition of ownership rights was satisfied in the absence of objective evidence of bona fide ownership. The Atyrau City Court satisfied M.'s claim regarding recognition of ownership rights due to the statute of limitations on a residential building, with respect to a land plot, the claim was denied. It follows from the case file that, in support of the claim, the plaintiff did not provide any documents on the availability of an apartment building at the address indicated by him, referring to the fire that had occurred. There is no information in the legal cadastre about the residential building and the land plot at the address indicated by the plaintiff.

Lawyer for civil disputes Evidence and proof

There are no title and identification documents in the case, and there is no information about the apartment building in the archives. The only available document is the protocol of the Executive Committee of the Guryev City Council of Workers' Deputies No. 16-17-1-1952 "On the allocation of land plots for individual construction." It follows from the text of this document that the executive committee has decided to allocate land plots for individual construction to 28 developers, however, there is no annex indicating which land plots and to whom they have been provided. A reference to the presence of an apartment building is contained in the certificate of the Ministry of Emergency Situations in Atyrau stating that on August 28, 2008, garbage burned on the territory of the requested apartment building, as a result of which the neighboring apartment building and the roof of another apartment building were destroyed. Photographs are filed in the case, from which it can be seen that there is no residential building on the land plot indicated by the plaintiff, there are remains of a dismantled structure. In this regard, the question arises as to which real estate object the court recognized the ownership right to. The very fact of owning an apartment building is also questionable, since the personal electricity bill at the specified address has been deleted since 2012, and the claim was filed with the court on May 22, 2018. Using this example, it should be clarified that the property claimed by the long-term owner must be available and the fact of continuous ownership must be 7 years by the time the claim is filed. G. filed a lawsuit with the court for recognition of ownership of the trailer for its registration with the authorized body and further use for its intended purpose. By the decision of the Al-Farabi District Court of Shymkent dated October 17, 2018, the claim of G. was reasonably denied due to the fact that the beekeeping trailer is a self-made structure and is made in an artisanal way, while it does not have technical and identification documents, is not intended for operation and participation in road traffic. There is no evidence in the case as to whether the trailer design meets the standards and requirements of road safety.

In this case, the plaintiff must register her rights to a self-made vehicle in accordance with the Technical Regulations on the Safety of Wheeled Vehicles. Thus, a claim for recognition of ownership rights by virtue of the statute of limitations can be filed only in respect of a thing that was previously put into civil circulation in accordance with the established procedure. In judicial practice, there are cases when a vehicle is not homemade, but there are no title documents for it. For example, the district court No. 2 of the Kokpektinsky district of the East Kazakhstan region satisfied the claims of A. and others for recognition of ownership of small vessels (boats). In a similar case, the Semey City Court of the East Kazakhstan region refused to satisfy M.'s claim for recognition of ownership rights due to the statute of limitations on the motor boat. In both cases, there were no documents for the boats, the vessels were purchased from unknown persons, and there is no documentary evidence of the transaction. For movable property, it is very difficult to establish circumstances that indicate a bona fide and open prescription possession. At the same time, in order to streamline civil law relations in the field of the use of small vessels, other motor vehicles, for example, snowmobiles, as well as to exclude the possibility of using unregistered vehicles to commit any violations in the field of environmental management, etc. it is impossible to exclude the possibility of recognizing ownership of such vehicles if they are in actual possession. In this case, the courts should carefully establish the circumstances under which the person became the owner of the item, as well as evidence of actual possession. In order to exclude the possibility of registration of rights to stolen items, the plaintiff should provide appropriate evidence from law enforcement agencies. The plaintiff also needs to confirm the compliance of the technical condition of such a facility with safety requirements. In another case concerning real estate, the Pavlodar City Court reasonably denied the claim of Sh. In the case, it is seen that the plaintiff, who is the owner of the dormitory room, actually attached part of the common areas to her room and asked to recognize ownership of them due to the statute of limitations. The court's conclusions are correct, since the disputed premises were not an independent real estate object, the plaintiff reconstructed part of the dormitory hall, but such reconstruction should be carried out in a different order: with the consent of other related owners and compliance with the necessary construction procedures. In the case of K.'s claim. The Baikonur District Court of Astana has decided to dismiss the claim. According to the case file, the plaintiff entered into an equity participation agreement in the construction of a residential complex.

Lawyer for civil disputes Evidence and proof

The construction was actually completed and the non-residential commercial and office premises were transferred to the plaintiff in 2007. The plaintiff cannot obtain title documents for the premises due to the fact that the residential complex was not put into operation due to the termination of the contract with the developer and the recovery of the amount paid by the shareholder in favor of the new housing and communal services complex. The court's refusal is justified by the fact that a claim for recognition of ownership rights by virtue of the statute of limitations can be filed only in respect of property that has been put into civil circulation. Immovable property is considered to be put into civil circulation if data about it is contained in the legal cadastre. In this case, the disputed object must be put into civil circulation in accordance with the procedure established by the Law "On Architectural, Urban Planning and Construction Activities", with the appropriate registration of rights. 

Attention!   

       Law and Law Law Law draws your attention to the fact that this document is basic and does not always meet the requirements of a particular situation. Our lawyers are ready to assist you in legal advice, drawing up any legal document suitable for your situation.  

 For more information,  please contact a Lawyer / Attorney by phone: +7 (708) 971-78-58; +7 (700) 978 5755, +7 (700) 978 5085. 

Attorney at Law Almaty Lawyer Legal Services Legal Advice Civil Criminal Administrative Cases Disputes Protection Arbitration Law Firm Kazakhstan Law Office  Court Cases