CrimeaPRESS reports:
A very unusual explanation, notes «Russian newspaper», the Supreme Court made in a dispute about the division during a divorce of real estate, in the purchase of which money from a mortgage loan and maternity capital were invested. The bank that provided the loan tried to intervene in the dispute between the former spouses. But the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation cooled the financiers’ ardor, declaring that this dispute did not concern them.
According to statistics, this summer 995 thousand people took out a mortgage. But last year there were one million such citizens. So in recent years, the numbers of Russians who take out mortgages have been stable. And such clarification from the Supreme Court may be useful to many. After all, the number of divorces is not decreasing yet. And if the house and land are under a mortgage, they can still be divided. In this case, all property owners will become joint mortgagors. This is what the Supreme Court decided when considering a dispute between former spouses.
The story began in the Krasnodar region.
A married couple bought land and built a cottage on it. And then the couple took out a loan secured by this property, for the improvement of which they also spent capital.
After the divorce, the former spouses began to divide the house and land. But the bank, as a mortgagee, opposed it. And the Supreme Court explained that the opinion of the credit institution in this situation is not taken into account*. The dispute was noticed by the Pravo.ru portal.
Now let’s talk about the details of the dispute.
Five years after the wedding and the birth of their first child, the couple bought a plot of land and began building a house on it. A couple of years later, the wife entered into a mortgage agreement: she took out a bank loan secured by land. The following year, the cottage was completed, and all the property was registered in the name of the wife.
When registering a house, Rosreestr established a restriction on its disposal in connection with a mortgage. According to the Law “On State Registration of Real Estate”.
And when the couple had a second child, the wife received maternity capital and spent it on improving the house with a plot. Since the state payment went to real estate, the cottage with the land had to be re-registered for the whole family within six months — as stated in Law No. 256 “On additional measures of state support for families with children.” But the woman did not do this. Well, then the marriage broke up.
Five years after the divorce, the ex-husband went to court to divide the family property. In the district court, he asked to divide the property into four equal parts — a quarter share should go to him, his ex-wife and two children. The court agreed with this, because according to the law, the ex-wife was supposed to register the house and land in the name of all family members, but she did not do this.
The bank, which had the property as a mortgage, did not agree with this decision. The bank went to court and there insisted that the collateral cannot be disposed of without its permission. It will be possible to register real estate for the whole family only after the loan is repaid and the collateral is removed.
The appeal bank respected and overturned the district court’s decision. These conclusions were later supported by cassation. Then the ex-husband complained to the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation.
And the high court explained: in order to allocate shares of family members, the bank’s consent is not necessary. Dividing the house and land does not terminate the mortgage obligations. This is stated in Article 353 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. In such a situation, the property becomes common, and all owners can be considered joint mortgagors.
It is impossible to refuse the division of property equipped with maternity capital just because it is collateral, the Supreme Court emphasized in its opinion and sent the dispute for a new appeal.
In this dispute, the decision of the first instance remained in force — the house and plot were allowed to be divided equally between the former spouses and their two children.
*Definition of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation N 18-KG22-144-K4
source: Russian newspaper
Crimea news | CrimeaPRESS: latest news and main events
Comments are closed.