Division of a land plot: by agreement of the owners, in court, allocation of a share in kind in common shared ownership and other

Cases and conditions for dividing a land plot into several

A plot of land can be divided in many cases, such as:

The land plot belongs to several persons who want to own their part separately,
The land plot belongs to one owner, who decides to sell part of the plot by dividing it into several plots,
The plot became the property of the heirs, who were unable to agree on its disposal and decided to divide it.

There may be other reasons for partition, the ones listed are the most common. Also, the division of the plot will depend on compliance with conditions, such as the maximum and minimum size of the land plot.

For different categories of land and permitted uses in each region, their sizes are established, and if a plot is divided into several plots and does not correspond to the sizes, then it will not be divided.
Just like a large plot will not be divided into several if the large plot has a minimum size established by the government.
The consent of all owners and the possibility of dividing into several will also be required .

Requirements for division

As a rule, a plot that is in shared ownership of several owners is allowed to be divided. Since when registering as common property, the parameters of the allotment are provided, allowing for its possible reorganization by allocating each share for autonomous use. For example, if a plot potentially meets the criteria for divisible land plots, it is permitted:

Register joint ownership in case of inheritance by several participants with or without allocation of shares.
Issue for spouses when dividing joint property, etc.

If the relevant characteristics are not enough, common ownership is not registered.

For example , if two heirs claim a plot with a total area of 12 acres, they will receive an inheritance in the form of a plot, which can later be divided. If two heirs argue over a plot of 7 acres, then joint ownership is not provided for due to the recognition of the plot as indivisible. The allotment will go to the one who has the priority right in inheritance (Articles 1170, 1182 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation).

The same situation will arise if a spouse tries to claim joint ownership of the plot after a divorce. In this case, it will be necessary to negotiate the provision of compensation to applicants who did not receive a share in the ownership of the land plot. Based on this provision, the state guarantees a certain orderliness in the reorganization procedure based on compliance with sanitary standards.

Minimum size of land plot during division

Plots are considered divisible if their total area is two minimum sizes or more. Such areas can be divided into 2 parts. Those. a land plot is divisible if, when divided into two owners, each owner has a plot of land not less than the minimum size.

The designated standards are determined in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Law adopted on October 25, 2001, No. 136-FZ. The government has established the determination of the minimum size of landfill as a sanitary norm that must not be violated. Standards are established in the constituent entities of the Russian Federation at the discretion of local authorities, based on the capabilities and specific conditions of the region. Accordingly, they are approved by local and municipal acts and regulations.

The minimum plot size is generally 6 acres. Some regions allow a norm of 4 acres . As a rule, smaller areas are not divided. If before the decision was made to establish the minimum standard, the land under a private house owned by two homeowners amounted to 7 acres, then the authorities are trying to prevent the privatization of such a site, offering its registration for an indefinite lease.

If, for one reason or another, citizens were able to register it as property or buy it out, it will not be possible to divide such a plot. Since the memory is of a non-standard size in the direction of reduction, it cannot be legally capable. The purchase and sale or donation of land will be difficult. The only way out is to sell it to its neighbors, carrying out a merger, which will restore its status.

These are the simple rules for the minimum area of a land plot when dividing it into two shares. What if you need to divide by three, etc.?

Additional requirements when dividing one memory into three or more

If the plot is divided into three parts, its area must be at least three minimum sizes . When dividing by four - no less than four. For such lands there are additional requirements. They are presented at the initial stage, at the time of agreeing on the division procedure with the cadastral engineer.

Considering the plan of the land to be divided (even previously taken into account), he visually plans the restoration of the boundaries in kind in such a way that no disputes arise between potential neighbors. A separate plot must have all the characteristics of a full-fledged autonomous plot. That is:

get separate access to the road;
have convenient access for vehicles;
have smooth boundaries;
eliminate overlap of boundary boundaries.

Often, vast territories make it difficult to divide due to the complex configuration of boundary boundaries , which do not allow the implementation of all the required requirements in accordance with Art. 261 Civil Code of the Russian Federation. The same result is expected if part of the allotment is occupied by a pond, swamp, or has other nuances that do not allow for proper allotment.

If it is impossible to meet the listed requirements, the memory section will be prohibited. In this case, it is permissible to replay the original plans, dividing it into a smaller number of participants, paying one of them the required compensation for the acquisition of a separate plot.

How to divide a plot of land into several

There are two ways to divide a land plot:

Administrative procedure
Judicial order.

In the first case, this is done if you are the sole owner, or there are several , but you managed to agree on the division and you do not have a dispute . To do this you first

schematically determine the boundaries of the proposed plots, for which you contact a specialist (cadastral engineer), who will prepare for you a boundary plan for dividing the land plot and the boundaries of the newly formed plots.
Afterwards, you draw up an agreement on the division of the plot, which reflects the number of plots, their area and owners (if there are several of them).
Next, you submit the boundary plan and agreement to the MFC, where first changes are made to the cadastre and new plots are reflected, then ownership of the new plots is registered and the owner (or several) receives extracts from the Unified State Register for the divided plots.
At this point, the partition process is considered complete.

Judicial procedure for dividing a land plot into several

If you are unable to reach an agreement, then go to court by drawing up and filing an appropriate statement of claim for division of the land plot . For this

describe the situation that there is a plot of land of a certain area (18 acres for example), owned, for example, by 3 persons in equal shares.
You wanted to allocate your share by dividing the specified land plot , but other owners refuse to do this voluntarily.
If you previously made a diagram with the proposed division and the coordinates of the site are indicated there, then in the request you ask to divide the site in accordance with this scheme and indicate the characteristic coordinates of the new site.
As an attachment to the claim, use an extract from the Unified State Register for the plot, a division diagram, a written request for a proposal to divide the plot, if there is a house on the plot, then an extract from the Unified State Register for the house.
In addition to the demand for division, also ask for recognition of ownership of the new plot.

Regulatory framework and the need for division

Land plots are classified as real estate. Therefore, any actions with them are regulated by two legislative acts. The division procedure itself is determined by the provisions of the Land Code of the Russian Federation (signed on October 25, 2001). The procedure for state registration is established by No. 218-FZ (signed on July 13, 2015). The current versions of both documents were adopted on the same day – 07/31/2020.

The participation of the judiciary in the division of land is not always required. In most cases, owners manage to come to an agreement on their own. Most often, one of the parties has to file a claim for division of a land plot in the following situations:

the land is jointly owned by the spouses who are divorcing;
the plot was inherited by several heirs;
the plot is in shared ownership of several owners;
the land belongs to non-profit organizations - country houses or gardens.

The more parties involved in a conflict situation, the more difficult it is to reach an agreement. The high value of land as a liquid asset makes resolving the issue even more difficult.

Forensic examination

At the trial, with a 90% probability, a land examination will be ordered to determine the possibility of dividing the land plot into several. An examination will be appointed either at your request (if there is no scheme) or at the initiative of the defendants if they continue to object to the division. The expert will conduct a study and determine the partition options and the possibilities of such a partition in accordance with the dimensions.

Based on the conclusion , the court will decide on the division of the land plot , but if the defendants do not object to the division in court, then the decision will be made according to the option you propose.

An example of dividing a plot into several

A client who inherited ½ share of a land plot applied for a land consultation; the other co-owner was the brother of the deceased. However, he wanted to sell his share of the plot , but buyers were scared off by the fact of shared ownership, and he refused to divide the plot.

The lawyer proposed to carry out the division through the court , since the area of the plot was 20 acres, and the minimum size of the plot was set at 6 acres.
Since the preliminary order for using the site had already been established , an examination was carried out at the trial, which proposed the only option for dividing the order of use.
The claim was clarified in accordance with the expert’s conclusion and the court divided the land plot into several plots and recognized the ownership of one of them as the client’s.

Court decision on the division of a residential building and land plot in kind No. 2-2932/2017

IN THE NAME OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

August 16, 2021 Ulyanovsk

Leninsky District Court of Ulyanovsk, consisting of:

under secretary R.R. Suleymanova,

Having considered in open court a civil case based on the claim of Pimanov A.A. to Neumoina V.I. on the division of a residential building and land plot in kind,

Plaintiff Pimanov A.A. filed a lawsuit against the defendant V.I. Neumoina. on the division of a land plot with a total area of 600 sq.m. located at the address: , termination of the right of common shared ownership of the land plot. in support of the following.

The plaintiff owns, by right of common shared ownership (1/2 share), a land plot (cadastral number), land category: land of settlements, permitted use: for residential development, total area 600 sq.m. and a residential building located on it (common shared ownership, 1/2 share), with a total area of 89.8 sq.m., cadastral number at the address: Ulyanovsk region, , on the basis of an agreement dated DD.MM.YYYY, certified by Sviridenko T.G., state notary of the 1st Ulyanovsk state notary office of the Ulyanovsk region, registration number No. and State Act No., issued on the basis of the Mayor’s decree No. dated DD.MM.YYYY for land ownership.

The plaintiff's right of shared ownership is registered in the Office of the Federal Service for State Registration, Cadastre and Cartography for the Ulyanovsk Region, which is confirmed by Extracts from the Unified State Register dated DD.MM.YYYY and from DD.MM.YYYY r.

The other co-owner of the share of the house and land is currently the defendant.

The plaintiff and defendant attempted to draw up an agreement to determine the procedure for ownership and use of a land plot or the allocation of a share of a land plot in relation to each, with the participation of a cadastral engineer from Rostekhinventarizatsiya LLC. Since, when placing points in kind, the defendant’s land plot was modified, reduced from its actual boundaries to its legal ones, the defendant was required to move the fence. The defendant and plaintiff were unable to reach agreement on this fact peacefully. There is no dispute between the owners about the boundaries of the land plot. The option of dividing the land plot proposed by the plaintiff does not infringe on the rights of the defendant, corresponds to the parties’ shares in the right of common shared ownership of the land plot, and does not violate the actual procedure for using the land plot established between the parties. The allocation of a share in kind is necessary for the plaintiff to carry out registration and cadastral work on the site.

The disputed land plot is divisible, that is, it can be divided into parts, and each part after division forms an independent land plot that meets the minimum standards for the provision of plots according to their intended purpose. These circumstances indicate that the share of the land owned by the plaintiff can be allocated in kind.

In connection with the above, the plaintiff is forced to go to court with this claim.

During the consideration of the case, the plaintiff made additional demands regarding the division of the residential building and termination of ownership of its share. He also clarified the previously stated requirements regarding the division of the land plot and asked to divide it according to option No. of the expert opinion. These requirements were accepted by the court for proceedings in this civil case.

This is important to know: State duty for transferring ownership of an apartment

The plaintiff and his representatives at the court hearing insisted on satisfying the claims in full, taking into account their clarification and additions, supported everything set out in the claim, and additionally explained the following to the court. Previously, the mother of the defendant, Boyarkina, was a co-owner of the share of the house and land plot, with whom there were no disputes regarding the use of the land plot. The plot was actually divided between the co-owners by raspberry bushes planted by the plaintiff. However, at present the new owner is N.I. Neumoina. put a fence on the plot in such a way that the raspberry bushes were given to her for use, and accordingly, the size of the plot belonging to the plaintiff decreased. The defendant does not want to remove this fence. They agree with the results of the forensic examination and ask the court to divide the plot according to option No., i.e. without taking into account the service area of the defendant's part of the residential building. since there are no disputes between the parties regarding the defendant’s access to the plaintiff’s land plot for her to maintain her part of the house.

The defendant explained at the court hearing that she also wants to divide the land plot and the house, but does not agree with the plaintiff on the option of dividing the plot proposed by the plaintiff, since he, in turn, does not agree on the establishment of the boundaries of the entire land plot, drawn up by her order by a cadastral engineer. She agreed with the conclusions of the forensic examination, explaining that she also agreed to the division of the land plot according to option No.

The representative of the third party of the Rosreestr Office for the Ulyanovsk Region did not appear at the court hearing. notified of the day of consideration of the case.

After listening to the parties, representatives of the plaintiff, examining the case materials, land management files, inventory files, the court comes to the following.

The court found that the plaintiff Pimanov A.A. and defendant Neumoina V.I. are co-owners of a residential building and a plot of land at the address: equal shares. those. By ?.

In fact, the indicated residential building has two independent exits; there are no premises for common use by the co-owners.

The land plot owned by co-owners in shares is also actually divided into two parts without a plot that is in common use of the parties.

According to the court, the plaintiff’s stated claims must be satisfied on the basis of the following.

In accordance with Art. 244 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, property owned by two or more persons belongs to them under the right of common ownership.

Property may be in common ownership with the determination of the share of each owner in the right of ownership (common ownership) or without determining such shares (joint ownership).

According to Art. 247 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, ownership and use of property in shared ownership is carried out by agreement of all its participants, and if agreement is not reached, in the manner established by the court.

A participant in shared ownership has the right to be provided with a part of the common property for his possession and use, in proportion to his share, and if this is not possible, he has the right to demand from other participants who own and use the property falling on his share, appropriate compensation.

In accordance with Art. 252 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, property that is in shared ownership can be divided between its participants by agreement between them. If the participants in shared ownership fail to reach an agreement on the method and conditions for dividing the common property, the participant in shared ownership has the right to legally demand the allocation in kind of his share from the common property.

The allocation of a share from the common property is the transfer of a part of this property into the ownership of a participant in the common property in proportion to his share in the right of common shared ownership and the termination for this person of the right of shared ownership of the common property. At the same time, the allocation of a share in kind is permissible if it is technically possible to create, on the basis of a previously single real estate object, two or several independent parts, each of which will have essential defining features that characterize these parts and allow them to be distinguished from other real estate objects.

For a correct and objective consideration of this case, as well as to determine the possibility of dividing the home ownership owned by the parties on the right of common shared ownership, the court appointed a judicial construction and technical examination.

In accordance with the conclusion of the forensic construction and technical examination, the expert came to the following conclusions.

They propose to fix the legal border:

- along the facade of the land plot along the actual border, taking into account the total length equal to the distance between the boundary boundaries of adjacent land plots 24.90 m = 2.97 + 5.58 + 4.34 + 2.34 + 9.67 (m),

- fix the legal rear boundary of the land plot according to the distance between the boundary boundaries of adjacent land plots, taking into account the legal area of the land plot of 600 sq.m., while the length of the legal rear boundary will be 15.23 + 13.78 (m),

— the left legal boundary runs along the boundary line of the land plot d/v: 3.66 + 21.05 + 0.68 +0.4 (m),

— the right legal boundary runs along the boundary line of the land plot d/v: 22.44 + 1.25 (m).

Taking into account the design features, the established procedure for use, the wishes of the parties expressed during the expert inspection, the division of house construction is possible with a minimal deviation from the size of the ideal shares of the parties - a boiler room with an area of 6 sq.m. completely passes to the plaintiff Pimanov A.A. The expert offers one option for dividing a residential building, reflected in Plan 1 of dividing a residential building in the appendix to the expert’s conclusion.

According to this option, the established procedure for using a residential building is fixed; with this option of division, two objects are formed.

— Premises of Pimanov A.A. with a total area of 51.8 sq.m. are formed from the room pos. “3” S=19.8 sq.m of extension lit. "A2", premises pos. “4” S=10.2 sq.m extension lit. "A1", premises pos. “5” S=6.4 sq.m extension lit. "A3", rooms pos. “8” S=9.4 sq.m of extension lit. "A5", premises pos. “9” S=6.0 sq.m extension lit. "A6", premises of the entrance hall lit. "a", "al".

— Premises of V.I. Neumoina with a total area of 38.0 sq.m. are formed from premises pos. “1” S=16.9 sq.m, pos. “2” S=4.5 sq.m., pos. “6” S=l.7 sq.m. residential building lit. "A", pos. “7” S=14.9 sq.m extension lit. "A4", seney lit. "a2".

The dividing line runs along the existing internal wall between the premises of the residential building lit. "A" and extension lit. "A2", extension lit. "A4" and extension lit. "A3".

According to the proposed option, no work on refurbishment of a residential building is required.

When determining the possibility of dividing the land plot, the expert indicated the following.

Taking into account the location of parts of the house and outbuildings of the co-owners on the land plot, the expert came to the conclusion: dividing the land plot with the area into ideal shares is possible.

The expert offers two options for dividing a land plot of 600 sq.m. Possible division options are reflected in Plans 2, 3 in the appendix to the conclusion: According to Plan 2 - division of the land plot into ideal shares corresponding to the variant of division of a residential building, taking into account regulatory requirements (the presence of a “repair zone”); According to Plan 3, the division of a land plot into ideal shares corresponds to the variant of dividing a residential building with a deviation from regulatory requirements (without the presence of a “repair zone”). The expert considers this option possible if the plaintiff and defendant agree to it, i.e. they undertake to allow the other party onto their land to carry out repair work.

So, according to option No. proposed by the expert, the area of the plot allocated to Pimanov A.A. consists of the area under the outbuildings lit. "A1", "A2". "A3", "L5". "A6", canopy lit. "A". “al”, an entryway without a letter, a metal garage, free land (shaded in blue) on the left side of the land plot (adjacent to the house) and is 300 sq.m.

The allocated land plot is located within the following boundaries:

— along the facade of the site ( ) – length 2.97+0.07 m,

— along the dividing line – length 5.92+0.30+ along the dividing line of housing construction (along the existing internal wall between lit. A and lit. A2, between lit. A4 and lit. A3) +3.32+3.49+ 15.48m,

- along the rear border of the site - length 3.03 + 15.23 m,

- along the left border of the site - 0.40 + 0.68 + 21.05 + 3.66 m.

The area of the plot allocated by V.I. Neumoina consists of the plot under the residential building lit. “A”, let’s add lit. "A4", under the canopy of lit. “a2”, under the sheds on the right side of the plot, free land (shaded in green) on the right side of the land plot (adjacent to the house) and is 300 sq.m.

The allocated land plot is located within the following boundaries:

- along the facade of the site ( ) - length 5.51 + 4.34 + 2.34 + 9.67 m,

- along the right border of the site - length 22.44 + 1.25 m,

This is important to know: Documents for obtaining a certificate of ownership

- along the rear border of the site - 10.75 m long,

- along the dividing line - length 15.48 + 3.49 + 3.22 + along the dividing line of housing construction (along the existing internal wall between lit. A4 and lit. A3, between lit. A and lit. A2) + 0.30+ 5.92m.

The dividing line between the plots of the co-owners is reflected in Plan 3 in the appendix to the conclusion in purple, the dimensions of the dividing line are in purple numbers.

With this option, there is no deviation in the area of plots allocated to co-owners from the ideal shares.

The court has no reason not to trust the conclusions of the said forensic examination, which was carried out by experts with appropriate qualifications and certain experience in their specialty. The experts were warned by the court about criminal liability for giving a knowingly false expert opinion.

Article 86 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation provides that the expert gives an opinion in writing. The expert's report must contain a detailed description of the research conducted, the conclusions drawn as a result and answers to the questions posed by the court. If, during the examination, an expert establishes circumstances that are important for the consideration and resolution of the case, about which no questions were asked to him, he has the right to include conclusions about these circumstances in his conclusion.

Thus, the content of the expert opinion available in the case complies with the requirements of current legislation.

Thus, this expert opinion is admissible evidence in the case and is assessed by the court in accordance with Art. 67 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation in conjunction with other evidence available in the case.

Moreover, the conclusions of the forensic examination were not disputed by the parties during the consideration of the case.

The court, taking into account the actual procedure for the use of the house and land plot by the co-owners, which coincides with the division plan according to the option of dividing the land plot No. proposed by the expert, the technical feasibility of dividing the house and land plot according to this option, the absence of objections from the co-owners themselves to this option of division, considers it possible to make a division houses according to payment No. to the expert opinion and a land plot between co-owners according to option No.

Thus, as a result of the division of a residential building and a land plot between the co-owners, independent real estate objects were actually formed, belonging to A.A. Pimanov (house and land plot) and V.I. Neumoina. (house and land).

Under such circumstances, taking into account that the right of common shared ownership of the plaintiff and defendant was registered in the Unified State Register, then, accordingly, the court considers it necessary to terminate the right of common shared ownership of the parties to the residential building and land plot at the address: .

Claims of Pimanov A.A. to satisfy.

Carry out a division of a residential building located at: , as follows:

- To allocate in kind from the common shared ownership of a residential building into the ownership of Pimanov A.A. part of a residential building with an area of 51.8 sq.m., formed from premises: pos. 3 with an area of 19.8 sq.m. extension lit A2, item 4 with an area of 10.2 sq.m. extension lit. A1, pos. 5 with an area of 6.4 sq.m. extension lit. A3, item 8 with an area of 9.4 sq.m. extension lit. A5, item 9 with an area of 6.0 sq.m. extension lit. A6, canopy lit. a, a1.

- Allocate in kind from the common shared ownership of a residential building into the ownership of V.I. Neumoina. part of a residential building with an area of 38.0 sq.m., formed from premises: item 1 with an area of 16.9 sq.m., item 2 with an area of 4.5 sq.m., item 6 with an area of 1.7 sq.m. residential building lit. A, item 7 with an area of 14.9 sq.m. extension lit. A4, entryway lit. A2.

Carry out a division of the land plot located at the address: , with a total area of 600 sq.m. in the following way:

Transfer to Pimanov A.A. ownership of a land plot with an area of 300 sq.m., including the building area, located within the following boundaries:

— along the facade of the site ( ) – length 2.97+0.07 m,

- along the rear border of the site - length 3.03 + 15.23 m,

- along the left border of the site - 0.40 + 0.68 + 21.05 + 3.66 m.

Transfer to V.I. Neumoina ownership of a land plot with an area of 300 sq.m., including the building area, located within the following boundaries:

- along the facade of the site ( ) - length 5.51 + 4.34 + 2.34 + 9.67 m,

- along the right border of the site - length 22.44 + 1.25 m,

- along the rear border of the site - 10.75 m long,

Terminate the right of common shared ownership of Pimanov A.A. for 1/2 share of a residential building and land plot located at: .

Terminate the right of common shared ownership of Neumoina V.I. for 1/2 share of a residential building and land plot located at: .

The decision can be appealed on appeal to the Ulyanovsk Regional Court through the Leninsky District Court of Ulyanovsk within a month from the moment the decision was made in final form.

Court decisions in the category “Disputes related to land use -> Disputes about land ownership -> other disputes about land ownership”

FULL NAME1 filed a lawsuit with the above-mentioned statement of claim against the defendant, the Territorial Administration of the Federal Agency for State Property Management of the Ulyanovsk Region. In connection with the reorganization in the form of annexation of the Territorial Administration.

The plaintiff applied to the court with a demand to force the defendant to vacate the land plot from a temporary facility that was unauthorizedly installed on it - a gray metal garage, approximately one meter in size, with a gable roof. Your requirements are mochi.