Provision of housing for military personnel, recovery of compensation in return for the right of gratuitous privatization of official housing, which is not subject to privatization
Cases of this category are subject to legal proceedings.
Jurisdiction.
Cases of this category are considered at the location of the defendant.
Persons involved in the case.
Participants in these legal relations are a serviceman or a discharged soldier, on the one hand, and a military unit, an organization that holds the disputed property, usually regional operational units, and which make the final decision on compensation (the relevant ministry or committee).
Evidence and proof.
When considering cases in this category, it is necessary to establish the following facts:
- the availability of official housing provided to the recipient, which is not subject to privatization, including due to its location in closed and isolated military towns, at border posts and commandant's offices;
- the plaintiff has the status of a serviceman who has been in military service for fifteen years or more in calendar terms as of January 1, 2013, and in the case of a dispute over the gratuitous privatization of service for more than twenty years in calendar terms;
- evidence of the need of the recipient and family members living with him in a dwelling (absence of other housing);
- the applicant's request with the relevant report with the necessary documents attached;
- the absence or presence of circumstances preventing the payment;
- the composition of the serviceman's family;
- calculation of the payout amount.
In the operative part of the decision to satisfy the claim, it is necessary to indicate the amount of compensation with an indication of the number of family members.
Example 1.
Z.R.R. filed a lawsuit with the RSE "Military Unit" to recover the lost monetary compensation in the amount of 8,039,880 tenge, as on February 12, 2015, she filed a report on the payment of monetary compensation for the cost of housing in return for the right to privatize housing. Based on the results of the review of the report, the commander of the military unit issued an order for the payment of monetary compensation in the amount of 20,099,700 tenge. However, after 10 months, the defendant paid compensation in the amount of KZT 12,059,820, excluding adult children who had completed full-time university studies at the time of payment of compensation.
The court's decision denied the claim. By a decision of the judicial board for civil cases of the regional court, the decision of the court of first instance was overturned and a new decision was made to satisfy the claim in full.
By the decision of the Judicial Board for Civil Cases of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan, the decision of the appellate instance was canceled, the case was sent for a new judicial review, since the appellate instance did not establish the factual circumstances of the case. Thus, there are no documents in the case file confirming the registration of Z.R.R. as a person in need of housing, as well as evidence that the daughter of the applicant's spouse, V.T.S., was a cohabiting family member.
The main issue in this case was the issue of correctly determining the composition of the applicant's family. The amount of monetary compensation is determined by multiplying the number of permanently cohabiting family members of the recipient, including himself, by the norms of the prescribed useful area (18 square meters) and the price of one square meter of sale of new housing on average in the republic for January of this year according to the data of the authorized body in the field of state statistics, published on its official website in accordance with with a statistical work plan. The family included: the applicant Z.R.R. , her husband V.S.A., a joint child V.R.S., the applicant's son Z.A.A., born in 1992, the spouse's daughter, V.T.S., born in 1993, the applicant married in April 2014, at the specified time the applicant's spouse's daughter studied at the university. During the examination of the case, the Court did not find out whether the applicant's spouse's daughter lived with the latter family.
Example 2. A.G.P. sued the Ministry of Defense of the Republic of Kazakhstan for additional monetary compensation in return for the right to privatize in the amount of 1,755,432 tenge.
The decision of the military court denied the claim. By the decision of the judicial board for civil cases of the regional court, the court's decision remained unchanged. By the decision of the Judicial Board for Civil Cases of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan, these judicial acts were canceled, and a decision was made to satisfy the claim.
The applicant, A.G.P., submitted a report on the payment of monetary compensation in return for the right to privatize official housing, since at the time of filing the report he had military service in calendar terms for more than twenty years, lived in a closed town and neither he nor his family members owned real estate. Based on the order dated November 24, 2014, the plaintiff was paid an amount of KZT 13,975,200 in exchange for the right to privatize office housing free of charge, based on the average market value of one square meter as of March 12, 2013 in the amount of KZT 194,100, while the amount of monetary compensation is determined based on the average market value of one square meter of new housing. housing in the Republic of Kazakhstan, according to the statistical data of the authorized body in the field of state statistics, indicated in the statistical bulletin as of March 12 this year. Consequently, the amount of compensation was determined incorrectly.
List of documents attached to the application
In accordance with the requirements of Article 149 of the CPC, including documents confirming the circumstances on which the plaintiff bases his claims, which may include:
- evidence of the plaintiff's status, his membership in the military;
- seniority documents;
- documents confirming the need of the plaintiff's family for housing;
- evidence of the provision of housing that is not subject to privatization;
- evidence of appeals to the defendants for compensation;
- the presence or absence of an order from the command of a military unit to pay monetary compensation in return for the right to privatize office housing free of charge;
- documents on the composition of the family;
- evidence of refusal to pay or payment of an incomplete amount of compensation , etc.
Laws to be applied in the consideration and resolution of cases, depending on the subject matter and grounds of the claim
The Constitution.
GK.
GPC.
Laws:
- "On housing relations";
- "About marriage (matrimony) and family";
- "On military service and the status of military personnel."
Regulatory resolution No. 9 of the Supreme Court dated July 18, 1997 "On the Practice of Applying legislation on the privatization of residential premises by Citizens".
Government Resolution No. 1092 of August 28, 2012 "On Approval of the Rules for Compensation of the Right to Gratuitous Privatization of Office Housing, which is not Subject to Privatization, including due to its Location in Closed and Isolated Military camps, Border posts and Commandant's offices"
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
