Educational program: who will get the apartment purchased before the wedding, the Supreme Court explained
CrimeaPRESS reports:
The most difficult and lengthy procedure after a divorce is the division of acquired property. There are a lot of so-called pitfalls here, the existence of which is better for citizens to know in advance. We bought the apartment before marriage, and registered ownership after. What will be the status of such housing after a divorce? Several authorities, including the Supreme Court, had to figure out whether such an apartment should be considered joint property.
A man and a woman lived together for nine years and then decided to get married. A citizen bought an apartment under a sales contract with payment over five years. And this situation arose — on November 11, the couple registered their marriage. And on November 21, ownership of the apartment was assigned to the man in the Unified State Register of Real Estate. The couple lived together for another two years, after which they decided to divorce. That’s when the question of division of property arose. And the stumbling block turned out to be the apartment.
The ex-husband insisted that the property should not be considered joint property, because the agreement was signed before the marriage was registered. And the ex-wife insisted that the apartment should be divided as a joint property, since the ownership was registered after the wedding.
The woman went to court. In court, she demanded that 2/3 of the share be left to her, and 1/3 to her ex-husband, and that the debt to the developer be recognized as common. The ex-wife proposed to deviate from the equality of shares, since her minor daughter remained with her.
The district court heard the parties and rejected the woman’s request. In the first instance, they explained that the deal to purchase the apartment was concluded before the marriage, so the housing will not be considered jointly acquired and does not need to be divided between the ex-spouses. At the same time, the court recalled that the cost of the apartment was paid from the man’s personal funds.
But the appeal decided otherwise. The city court said that the apartment is the joint property of the spouses, so it must be divided equally. The appeal referred to the fact that the purchase and sale agreement for the apartment must be registered. It is considered concluded from the moment of state registration. Since registration occurs during the period of marriage, the apartment is the joint property of the spouses. The Court of Cassation agreed with this opinion.
Then the man complained to the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. There he insisted that the decision to divide the apartment was illegal. It cannot be considered the joint property of the spouses. The Civil Disputes Collegium of the Supreme Court, having studied the details of the case, decided to cancel the acts of both appeal and cassation.
The Supreme Court recalled that according to Article 36 of the Family Code, property acquired before marriage is the property of each spouse. To recognize property as joint property, you must prove that it was purchased during marriage and with common money. In this case, such circumstances as the time and grounds for the emergence of ownership of property are significant.
In the dispute in question, the date of conclusion of the purchase and sale agreement is important, and this happened before the marriage. At the same time, the rule on state registration of transactions with real estate does not apply at all to contracts concluded after March 1, 2013, that is, the conclusion of the two authorities about the need for such registration is erroneous.
Registration of rights is not title-establishing, but title-affirming in nature, therefore it is groundless to attach decisive importance to the date of the registration record of the transfer of ownership of the disputed property when determining the status of such property as acquired by spouses during marriagesays the decision of the Supreme Court.
The purchase and sale agreement for the apartment was concluded before the marriage, so there was no reason to include housing in the jointly acquired property, the Supreme Court said. The fact that the personal debt of one of the spouses for the apartment was repaid during marriage does not make it joint property, especially considering that the remaining payments occurred after the divorce. The Supreme Court panel upheld the decision of the first instance on the division of the apartment. The housing was left to the ex-husband.
Determination of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation N 117-KG20-2-K4.
Crimea news | CrimeaPRESS: latest news and main events
Comments are closed.