In what cases is a statement of claim drawn up to establish the fact of acceptance of an inheritance? Sample document

1. Ways to accept an inheritance
2. Why do you need a court decision to establish the fact of acceptance of an inheritance?
3. Establishing the fact of acceptance of inheritance by the deceased
4. What to do next

Having inherited certain property, some heirs use it as their own, without taking any measures to register rights to it. Moreover, if no one except them lays claim to this property. In this case, there is actual acceptance of the inheritance.

This method is recognized as legal, although it may create some problems for the heir when preparing documents and attempting to make transactions with the received property.

We bring to your attention an article in which we will consider the methods of accepting an inheritance provided for by current legislation, and also inform you about why a court decision is needed to establish the fact of accepting an inheritance.

In addition, using a specific example, we will talk about the circumstances under which it is necessary to establish the fact of acceptance of the inheritance by the deceased. We will also talk about what the heir should do after the court determines that the inheritance has been accepted.

Description of the situation

At a consultation with a lawyer, citizen “D” reported that on July 13, 2009, her husband, citizen “N,” died. After his death, an inheritance was opened, which included: an apartment located at the address: Moscow, Avenue *****, house **/**, apartment ** and a Hyundai Sonata car, state number ***** **. The marriage with citizen “N” was registered on December 1, 2007, but citizen “D” lived in the indicated apartment long before the marriage was registered (since 2000). Together with citizen “N” she bore the costs of maintaining the above-mentioned apartment. After the death of her husband, until 2010, citizen “D” also lived in the apartment, paid utilities, and incurred expenses for maintaining the living space. In addition, in marriage with citizen “N”, a Hyundai Sonata was purchased, license plate number *******. Citizen “D”, after the death of her husband, continues to use the specified car and has improved its technical condition (replaced the oil, filter, brake fluid, brake pads). In addition, citizen “D” accepted for storage the personal belongings of the deceased: driver’s license, vehicle registration certificate, weapons storage permit, insurance certificate.

The heir is also the minor son of the deceased - citizen “N.V.” After the death of her husband, citizen “D” formalized guardianship of the minor. At the beginning of 2010, citizen “D” was forced to move out of the apartment located at the address: Moscow, Avenue *****, building **/**, apartment **, due to constant conflicts with the minor “N.V.” .”, however, her things remained in the apartment: a refrigerator, a washing machine, an extractor hood, a stove, and her daughter’s toys. At the same time, citizen “N.V.” another guardian was appointed. Citizen “D” asked a lawyer to help her arrange an inheritance after the death of her husband.

Documentary confirmation of inheritance

The actual acceptance of the inheritance must be supported by adequate evidence. Their list is contained in the Methodological Recommendations of the Notary (Protocol No. 02/07 of 02.27-28.2007).

The Supreme Court takes a similar legal position. The corresponding explanations are given in the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Council No. 9.

List of acceptable actions (documents)

Important! Reimbursement of expenses associated with the funeral of the testator at the expense of the inheritance is not evidence of actual entry into the inheritance. The right to organize a funeral and receive compensation for expenses is given to any relative of the deceased, regardless of inheritance rights.

If the applicant is a co-owner of property that belonged to a deceased citizen, then the use of the object is not evidence of actual acceptance of the inheritance (Article 36 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court No. 9).

The presented list of circumstances and possible documents is not exhaustive. The heir can provide other documents confirming the entry into inheritance rights. The final decision is made by the notary. If the heir turned to the notary and was refused to issue a certificate, then he will have to prepare documents for the court.

Drawing up a statement of claim

Lawyer Polyak Maria Ivanovna, after listening to citizen “D” and examining the circumstances of the case, advised citizen “D” to apply to the court with a statement of claim to establish the fact of acceptance of the inheritance, recognition of ownership of 1/2 share of the apartment and ownership of the car. Citizen “D” decided to seek legal assistance from lawyer M.I. Polyak. and asked to help her prepare a statement of claim and represent her interests in court.

Polyak Maria Ivanovna prepared a statement of claim, in which she indicated all the circumstances described by citizen “D”. In addition, the lawyer indicated that after the death of citizen “N”, the Plaintiff accepted the inheritance that opened after the death of her husband, and has the right to a 1/2 share of the apartment located at the address: Moscow, Avenue *****, building **/ **, apartment **, as well as 3/4 shares of the Hundai Sonata car, state number *******.

The lawyer indicated that after the death of her husband, the Plaintiff took a number of actions that indicate the actual acceptance of the inheritance, in particular, she took possession of an apartment located at the address: Moscow, Avenue *****, house **/**, apartment * *, took measures to ensure its safety. She continued to use the testator’s apartment for living, i.e., for the purpose provided for by the current legislation (clause 1 of Article 17 of the Housing Code), paid utility bills, and incurred the costs of maintaining the living space.

The Hyundai Sonata car, license plate *******, was purchased by the spouses during their marriage. After the death of citizen “N”, the Plaintiff took a number of actions aimed at improving the technical condition of the car: changing the oil, filters, brake fluid, brake pads.

According to Article 39 of the Family Code of the Russian Federation, when dividing the common property of spouses and determining shares in this property, the shares of the spouses are recognized as equal, unless otherwise provided by the agreement between the spouses.

According to Art. 1142 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the heirs of the first priority according to the law are the children, spouse and parents of the testator. Based on the fact that the Plaintiff, by law, has the right to 1/2 of the car, as well as 1/2 of the testator’s share of the said car, the total size of her share is 3/4. Citizen "N.V." has never used a car and does not have a license to drive a vehicle. The lawyer indicated in the lawsuit the possibility of recovery from the Plaintiff in favor of citizen “N.V.” funds in the amount of ***** thousand **** rubles ** kopecks towards the cost of 1/4 share of the Hyundai Sonata car.

Part 4 of Article 35 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation guarantees the right of inheritance. By virtue of paragraph 1 of Article 1152 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, in order to acquire an inheritance, the heir must accept it.

According to Article 1153 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, it is recognized, until otherwise proven, that the heir has accepted the inheritance if he has performed actions indicating the actual acceptance of the inheritance, in particular, if the heir: has taken possession or management of the inherited property; took measures to preserve the inherited property, protect it from encroachments or claims of third parties; made at his own expense expenses for the maintenance of the inherited property; paid at his own expense the debts of the testator or received funds due to the testator from third parties. Part 1 of Article 1154 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation establishes that an inheritance can be accepted within six months from the date of opening of the inheritance.

In the statement of claim Polyak M.I. asked:

1. To establish the fact that citizen “D” accepted the inheritance that opened after the death of citizen “N”;
2. Recognize for citizen “D” the ownership of a 1/2 share of the apartment located at the address: Moscow, Avenue *****, building **/**, apartment **;
3. Recognize for citizen “D” the ownership of a car of the Hyundai Sonata brand (Hyundai Sonata), state number *******;
4. To recover from citizen “D” in favor of citizen “N.V.” funds in the amount of ***** thousand **** rubles ** kopecks towards the cost of 1/4 share of the Hyundai Sonata car.

When is it necessary to establish the fact of acceptance of an inheritance?

If for some reason the heir was unable to visit the notary's office, but uses the transferred things or real estate on an actual basis, according to the law he is still the new owner of the property. This right is enshrined in Article 1153 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation.

It is important to note that in this case he can own and use the property, but not dispose of it. Therefore, the urgent need for legal registration arises only when it is necessary to dispose of property, for example, when it is necessary to exchange or sell value. Without a document on ownership, it is impossible to conclude a transaction , that is, a purchase and sale agreement can be signed, but it is not possible to formalize the transfer of ownership from one owner to another. Therefore, there is a growing need to visit the relevant institutions to legally prove your rights.

Consideration of the case in court

At the court hearing, lawyer M.I. Polyak. supported the claims and asked them to be satisfied.

Legal representative of citizen “N.V.” stated in court that citizen “N.V.” was registered in an apartment located at the address: Moscow, Avenue *****, building **/**, apartment ** from birth, i.e. since 1995. His grandfather and father, the now deceased citizen “N”, were also registered there. On October 25, 1996, an agreement was signed to transfer No. ***** of the specified apartment into the ownership of the grandfather, citizen “N.L.”, while citizen “N” refused privatization, and the interests of the minor were not taken into account. In this connection, this transfer agreement is invalid by virtue of Article 168 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, as a void transaction. 04/01/1999 between the grandfather and father of citizen “N.V.” a lifelong maintenance agreement with dependents was concluded, according to which citizen “N.L.” transferred the indicated apartment to citizen “N,” and the latter undertook to support citizen “N.L.” for life. The legal representative also stated that since the agreement for the transfer of the apartment into the ownership of citizen “N.L.” is illegal, then all subsequent transactions are illegal by virtue of Article 168 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. On February 17, 2005, citizen “N.L.” died, the only legal heir is his grandson, citizen “N.V.” The inheritance included a 1/2 share in the ownership of the apartment, in connection with which the specified apartment is subject to exclusion from the inheritance mass that opened after the death of citizen “N.”

It was also stated that after the death of citizen “N”, citizen “D” illegally used the disputed car, since the power of attorney for the right to drive the car after the death of the owner lost its force, but she refused to return the car to the heir and hid it. The defendants asked to recognize citizen “D” as an unworthy heir, since after the death of citizen “N” she gained access to the safe where 600,000 (six hundred thousand) rubles belonging to the deceased were kept and spent them at her own discretion, thereby depriving citizen “N.V.” ." inheritance of this property.

Legal representative of citizen “N.V.” also noted that the son of the deceased entered into an inheritance after the death of his father, which is confirmed by certificates of the right to inheritance by law (for a car and an apartment).

State duty and expenses for legal services

Unlike a notary's office, the state fee through the court differs in that its cost is not affected by the family ties of the deceased person and the heir. The state duty when going to court depends on the value of the inherited property, as established by Article 333 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation.

Cost calculations are carried out by both public and private appraisal companies.

The maximum amount of financial resources that can be taken for consideration of a claim is 60 thousand rubles. The minimum threshold is set at 400 rubles.

In addition to the state fee, the actual heir of the property is recommended to use the assistance of a lawyer involved in drawing up the statement of claim. He will be able to control the proper preparation and submission of the document to the judicial authority.

The lawyer will be able to defend the interests of the plaintiff in court and will help to collect all the necessary documents; his services will also have to be paid for.

For many heirs, these payments are important because not everyone understands the legal aspects, and the help of a qualified specialist is necessary.

Updated statement of claim

During the consideration of the case, it turned out that, secret from citizen “D,” the legal representative of the minor “N.V.” registered through a notary the inheritance left after the death of citizen “N” for a minor. At the same time, information was hidden from the notary that the deceased was married and his wife also claims to inherit. Lawyer M.I. Polyak, after consulting with the principal, citizen “D,” prepared an updated statement of claim, in which she indicated that the new guardian of the minor citizen “N.V.” a Hyundai Sonata brand car, state number ******* and the disputed apartment were secretly from citizen “D” registered in the name of citizen “N.V.”, as evidenced by the corresponding certificates of the right to inheritance under the law from 07/09/2010. When registering ownership of the specified property, information was hidden from the notary that the son of the late citizen “N.” is not the only heir of the first stage, information was not provided about the wife of the deceased - citizen “D”, who is the Plaintiff in the case, who kept the car in a paid parking lot and who had all the documents for the car. In addition, the notary did not clarify the fact that the car was purchased during marriage and is the joint property of the deceased and citizen “D”. The notary also did not clarify the information that after the death of her husband, citizen “D” lived in the disputed apartment and paid utility bills.

In the amended statement of claim, the lawyer indicated that the notary did not take into account the provisions of Article 1168 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, according to which the heir, who together with the testator had the right of common ownership of an indivisible thing (Article 133), a share in the right to which is included in the inheritance, has upon division inheritance the preferential right to receive, on account of their inheritance share, things that were in common ownership over heirs who were not previously participants in the common property, regardless of whether they used this thing or not. The plaintiff has the right to 1/2 of the car, since the car was purchased during marriage, but the funds are jointly acquired.

When is recognition of ownership necessary?

The need to recognize ownership of inherited property may arise in relation to real estate that was not registered during his lifetime.

This is explained by the fact that according to the law, state registration is required for the transfer of buildings, structures, premises in them and land plots to the full ownership of the copyright holder. And, if the testator did not manage to do this during his lifetime, his successors may have problems.

The heirs will not be able to accept an object, the ownership of which is not confirmed by an extract from the Unified State Register of Real Estate, and therefore the first thing they will need to do is to achieve recognition of the ownership of the disputed real estate.

The controversial category may include:

1. Unauthorized buildings. An object erected or reconstructed before the creation of a new building without the appropriate permission and not subsequently legalized is not the property of the testator. But it can be recognized as the personal property of the deceased through the court. To do this, two conditions are necessary: ​​the presence of official confirmation of the testator’s ownership of the land on which the unauthorized building was erected, and technical documentation for the object, justifying its safety and compliance with construction standards.
2. Objects of an unfinished transaction. When the purchase and sale agreement is signed and it is reliably known that this action fully reflects the will of the former owner, and the buyer fulfilled his obligations under the transaction in good faith, the rights to the object actually transfer to him. But to officially confirm the transfer of ownership, state registration is required. And, if the acquirer died before contacting the competent authority, his heir receives his authority to complete the transaction. The seller has no right to evade registration in this case - this threatens him with a lawsuit.
3. Non-privatized living space. Privatization that was not completed due to the death of the applicant is not grounds for refusal by the body authorized in this area. If the tenant of the living space or the tenant included in the contract has properly completed and submitted an application for privatization, and also brought the necessary documents in this case, it is considered that he has done everything in his power and the landlord’s representative must also fulfill his duties. But since the municipality will no longer have anyone to enter into an agreement with, the heirs of the deceased applicant will have to recognize ownership of the apartment in court.

In any of the above situations, the successors have the right to apply to the court for recognition of the testator's property rights. This is necessary to include the disputed object in the estate and the possibility of its subsequent transfer to a new copyright holder.

Counterclaim

The defendants filed a counter-claim against citizen “D” and the Dzhp and ZhF Moscow, in which they asked the court:

1. Invalidate transfer agreement No. **** in terms of transfer to citizen “N.L.” 1/2 share of an apartment located at the address: Moscow, Avenue *****, building **/**, apartment **;
2. Recognize citizen as “N.V.” ownership of an apartment located at the address: Moscow, Avenue *****, building **/**, apartment ** in the order of privatization and in the order of inheritance;
3. To invalidate the lifelong maintenance agreement with dependents concluded between citizen “N.L.” and citizen "N";
4. Recognize citizen “D” as an unworthy heir, exclude her from inheriting according to the law the property remaining after the death of citizen “N”;
5. Based on clause 3 of Article 1168 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, recognize the citizen as “N.V.” priority right to receive, on account of his inherited share, a residential premises (apartment located at the address: Moscow, Avenue *****, house **/**, apartment **), the division of which is impossible.

Representative of citizen “D”, lawyer M.I. Polyak. At the court hearing, she asked to dismiss the counterclaim.

Deadlines for consideration and execution of cases

After filing a claim, all documents and the application itself will be checked within five days. If everything is in order with the documents, then a court date will be set.

It is difficult to say how long the review will take, because to a large extent this factor depends on the amount of evidence and on the behavior of all participants in the process.

In courts of general jurisdiction, the decision made will gain force after the expiration of a period of 10 days . This period is established for filing an appeal to a higher court by all persons interested in this issue.

The court's decision

After listening to the lawyer of citizen “D”, the representative of citizen “N.V.”, witnesses in the case, and assessing the evidence presented, the court found. According to Part 1 of Art. 39 of the RF IC, when dividing the common property of spouses and determining shares in this property, the shares of the spouses are recognized as equal, unless otherwise provided by the agreement between the spouses. According to Art. 1142 heirs of the first priority according to the law are the children, spouse and parents of the testator. In accordance with Art. 1152 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, in order to accept an inheritance, the heir must accept it in the manner prescribed by law. According to Article 1153 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, acceptance of an inheritance is carried out by submitting, at the place of opening of the inheritance, to a notary or an official authorized in accordance with the law to issue certificates of the right to inheritance, an application from the heir to accept the inheritance or an application from the heir to issue a certificate of the right to inheritance. It is recognized, until otherwise proven, that the heir accepted the inheritance if he performed actions indicating the actual acceptance of the inheritance, in particular, if the heir:

• Entered into possession or management of inherited property;
• Took measures to preserve the inherited property, protect it from encroachments or claims of third parties;
• Has incurred expenses for the maintenance of the inherited property at his own expense;
• Paid the debts of the testator at his own expense or received funds due to the testator from third parties.

At the court hearing, the fact of acceptance of the inheritance by citizen “D” after the death of citizen “N” was confirmed, since she accepted for storage the property belonging to him, namely: a car, personal belongings, paid for the funeral, paid for utilities until 2010 for the disputed apartment, and maintained it and stores his things in this apartment. The other party did not present evidence to the contrary to the court.

Under such circumstances, since citizen “D” actually accepted the inheritance, her demand for recognition of her, as an heir according to the law of the first priority, ownership of a 1/2 share in the disputed apartment is legal, justified and subject to satisfaction. In addition, the requirement to recognize her ownership of a Hyundai Sonata car is also subject to satisfaction, since by virtue of Article 39 of the RF IC, she is the owner of 1/2 of the car purchased during her marriage to citizen “N”, and is also an heir to 1/2 of the testator's share of the car. Thus, the total size of her share is 3/4.

In addition, since citizen “D” has been recognized as having the right of ownership of a 1/2 share in the disputed apartment and the right of ownership of the disputed car, then the certificates of inheritance according to the law issued to citizen “N.V.” notary of Moscow should be declared invalid.

The counterclaim cannot be satisfied. Thus, at the time of privatization of the apartment located at the address: Moscow, Avenue *****, building **/**, apartment **, minor citizen “N.V.” was not registered in the disputed apartment, therefore the agreement on the transfer of ownership of the apartment cannot be declared invalid. In addition, taking into account the testimony of witnesses that citizen “N.V.” actually lived in the disputed apartment, the court found no grounds for declaring the apartment transfer agreement invalid, since the representative of the defendant in the counterclaim stated that the statute of limitations had expired. According to clause 1 of Article 181 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the limitation period for a claim to apply the consequences of the invalidity of a void transaction is three years. The limitation period for the specified claim begins from the day when the execution of this transaction began.

The court considered that the legal representatives of citizen “N.V.”, knowing about the violation of the minor’s rights, should have challenged the deal in court, which was not done. 16 years have passed since the start of execution of the transaction, and the legal representative filed a claim in court in 2012, having missed the statute of limitations. Thus, the court has no legal grounds to satisfy the claim, since the Plaintiff in the counterclaim missed the limitation period and the court was not presented with evidence of valid reasons for missing the limitation period for the stated claims.

Also, the court cannot agree with the requirement to recognize citizen “D.” an unworthy heir, since the court was not presented with evidence that she, through deliberate unlawful actions directed against the testator or against citizen “N.V.”, or against the implementation of the testator’s last will expressed in the will, contributed (tried to) promote the vocation of herself or others persons to inherit or contributed (tried to) facilitate an increase in the share of the inheritance due to them or other persons, if these circumstances are confirmed in court. Also, the court was not presented with indisputable evidence of the seizure by citizen “D” of the funds of the deceased citizen “N”.

Also, the court did not find legal grounds for recognizing citizen “N.V.” priority right to receive the disputed apartment against the inheritance share. According to clause 3 of Article 1168 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, if the inheritance includes residential premises (a residential building, apartment, etc.), the division of which in kind is impossible, when dividing the inheritance, the heirs who lived in this residential premises on the day the inheritance was opened and who do not have other residential premises, have, over other heirs who are not the owners of the residential premises included in the inheritance, a priority right to receive this residential premises against their inherited shares.

According to clause 1 of Article 1170 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the disproportion of the inherited property, the priority right to which the heir claims on the basis of Article 1168 or 1169 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, with the inheritance share of this heir is eliminated by the transfer by this heir to the remaining heir of other property from the inheritance or by the provision of other compensation , including payment of the appropriate amount of money. According to paragraph 54 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated May 29, 2012 No. 9 “On judicial practice in inheritance cases,” the court has the right to refuse to satisfy the specified preemptive right, establishing that this compensation is not proportionate compensation for the inheritance shares of the remaining heirs who do not have such a preemptive right, or its provision is not guaranteed.

In connection with the above, the court decided:

1. Claims of citizen “D” against citizen “N.V.” on establishing the fact of acceptance of the inheritance, invalidating the certificate of inheritance by law, recognizing the ownership of a 1/2 share of an apartment and the right of ownership of a car.
2. To establish the fact that citizen “D” accepted the inheritance that opened after the death of citizen “N”.
3. Invalidate the “N.V.” issued to a citizen Notary of Moscow, certificate of right to inheritance according to the law dated 07/09/2010.
4. Invalidate the “N.V.” issued to a citizen and about. Moscow notary certificate of the right to inheritance according to the law dated March 30, 2010.
5. Recognize for citizen “D” the right of ownership of a 1/2 share of an apartment located at the address: Moscow, Avenue *****, building **/**, apartment ** by way of inheritance by law after the death of citizen “N” , the remaining 1/2 share in the apartment is recognized as belonging to citizen “N.V.”
6. Recognize citizen "D"'s right of ownership of a Hyundai Sonata brand car, state number *******, by way of inheritance by law after the death of citizen "N".
7. To recover from citizen “D” in favor of citizen “N.V.” compensation for 1/4 share in the car in the amount of ** thousand *** rubles ** kopecks.

The decision is the basis for registering ownership of a 1/2 share in an apartment located at the address: Moscow, Avenue *****, building **/**, apartment ** for citizen “D” and 1/2 share in an apartment located at the address: Moscow, Avenue *****, building **/**, apartment ** behind citizen “N.V.”

Counterclaim by citizen “N.V.” to citizen “D” leave without satisfaction.

Conditions of the procedure

The Civil Code of the Russian Federation provides for the right of an heir to accept property transferred from a deceased person or to refuse it. In the first case, the heir has two options: contact a notary and write an application to enter into an inheritance, and then receive a certificate of inheritance, or actually be an heir, without drawing up the relevant documents.

The second method is very dangerous, because other relatives may appear claiming to receive valuables from the previous owner. In addition, an apartment for which the right of inheritance has not been formalized cannot be sold or exchanged. The first option is preferable and safer.

The actual owner of the transferred property has two options to correct the current situation:

1. The first is to visit a notary if the period allotted by the state (6 months, according to Article 1154 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation) has not expired.
2. The second is when you have to prove in court your right to extend the allotted period.

Judicial proceedings are envisaged only if the deadline for applying to a notary has expired and a written refusal has been issued. One appeal will not be enough. In court, the plaintiff will be required to prove compelling reasons that led to missing the allotted six-month deadline.

The legislation provides for circumstances in which no initiative has been taken to consolidate formal actions to register property, but, despite this, the citizen considers the property to be his own, and the following facts have been established:

• Monitoring the safety of property.
• Payment of bills from the former owner.
• Maintenance of property at your own expense.
• Use of property for its intended purpose.

Based on the statement of the Plenum of the Supreme Court dated May 29, 2012, number 9, the heir must treat this property as if it were his own.

Sometimes situations occur when the property was jointly owned with the deceased, but the person who became the heir lives in another area or city. In this case, he needs to move into a living space and pay all utility bills, then he will be considered the actual owner.

Actual inheritance cannot be officially recognized in the following cases:

1. if there is insufficient evidence of a relationship with the deceased, if there is no will;
2. in the case of a will drawn up for another citizen;
3. unless evidence of missing the deadline for an important reason is presented to the court.

Appealing the decision

In response to the said decision by citizen “N.V.” and his representatives filed an appeal to the Moscow City Court, which indicated that the decision cannot be recognized as legal and justified and is subject to cancellation with the issuance of a new decision in accordance with the provisions of Article 328 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation to refuse to satisfy the original claim and satisfy the counterclaim claim in full.

According to citizen “N.V.” and his representatives, the appealed decision was made due to an incorrect determination of the circumstances relevant to the case: failure to prove the circumstances relevant to the case established by the court of first instance; discrepancy between the conclusions of the court of first instance, set out in the court decision, and the circumstances of the case; in violation of substantive and procedural law.

The appeal stated that the court’s references to the fact that “since at the time of privatization, citizen “N.V.” was not registered in the disputed apartment, then the agreement on the transfer of ownership of the apartment cannot be declared invalid.” According to the legal position of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, repeatedly expressed in its decisions and retaining its force, registration at the place of residence or the lack thereof can serve as a basis for restriction or a condition for the exercise of the rights and freedoms of citizens (resolutions dated January 15, 1998 No. 2-P and dated 04.04 .1996 No. 9-P, Determination dated 05.10.2000 No. 199-O). In addition, during the trial, it was confirmed that citizen “N.V.” at the time of privatization, he lived in the disputed apartment and had the right to participate in its privatization. The arguments of the court of first instance about the lack of respect for the reasons for the absence of citizen “N.V.” are unfounded. the period for challenging the privatization agreement for the disputed apartment. These violations were committed precisely by the testator, who was the legal representative at the time of the invalid transaction (the father of citizen “N.V.”). Bringing a claim against oneself is not provided for by civil procedural legislation. Since the property left the possession of citizen “N.V.” without his will, on the basis of Articles 302, 305 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the lifelong maintenance agreement with dependents concluded on 04/01/1999 between citizen “N.L.” and citizen “N.” is also subject to recognition as invalid.

The appeal also states that the conclusions of the trial court about the absence of grounds for recognizing citizen “D.” are not based on the law and the actual circumstances of the case. an unworthy heir on the basis of Article 1117 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. In particular, the court indicated that “no indisputable evidence was presented of the seizure of funds in the amount of 600,000 rubles by citizen “D”. However, according to the testimony, witness “B” explained that after the death of citizen “N”, citizen “D” took money from the safe from the sale of the dacha in the amount of 600,000 rubles, some of which citizen “N” wanted to give to his brother, and citizen “D” she took them away without saying anything to citizen “N.V.”. The court did not give this testimony a proper legal assessment, in violation of the requirements of Article 67 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation.

The court unreasonably did not apply in relation to the disputed apartment the provisions of paragraph 3 of Article 1168 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, according to which if the inheritance includes a residential premises (apartment), the division of which in kind is impossible, when dividing the inheritance, the heirs who lived in this residential premises on the day opening an inheritance and not having any other residential premises, have, over other heirs who are not the owners of the residential premises included in the inheritance, a priority right to receive this residential premises on account of their inherited shares. However, in relation to the disputed car, the court of first instance considered it possible to apply precisely this provision in favor of citizen “D”, thereby allowing a violation of the principles of equality of parties and the right to judicial protection of citizen “N.V.” Thus, according to the appellants, the refusal to citizen “N.V.” in satisfying the counterclaim is illegal and unfounded.

What to do next

After receiving a satisfactory court decision, the heir can begin to draw up a certificate of inheritance. He will need:

1. Contact a notary at the place where the inheritance was opened.
2. Write an application for the issuance of a certificate of title.
3. Specify the list of required papers, collect and attach them to the application.
4. Pay the state fee (0.3–0.6% of the value of the inherited property, depending on the degree of relationship).
5. Come on the appointed day to receive the document. You can request that the certificate be sent to the specified address for an additional fee (1.5 thousand rubles by email, 2 thousand rubles by mail and 2.3 thousand + 5 thousand rubles in person by a notary).

Further, the successor has the right to suspend registration or contact an authorized institution to carry out registration (receive property):

1. Rosreestr - for registration of real estate.
2. MREO STSI - car re-registration.
3. Tax office - entering data about the new owner of the share of the authorized capital of the LLC.
4. The bank branch in which the testator opened a deposit - receiving funds from the accounts of the deceased.

If the successor's right of ownership of the inherited property has been recognized in court, he can proceed with its registration without going through a notary, since he no longer needs to obtain a notarial certificate (this document will be replaced by a copy of the judge's decision).

Proving facts of legal significance, as a rule, is fraught with difficulties that cannot always be resolved on our own. To successfully complete a case, you need to know and take into account many nuances, and in addition, act competently and in a timely manner - look for evidence, collect documents, bypass various authorities and negotiate with opponents.

In order to avoid a critical situation in such tense conditions (or get out of it as painlessly as possible), we recommend that you seek a free consultation from the lawyers of the website ros-nasledstvo.ru. You can write to them now by using the online form or by dialing the specified phone number.

FREE CONSULTATIONS are available for you! If you want to solve exactly your problem, then

:

• describe your situation to a lawyer in an online chat;
• write a question in the form below;
• call Moscow and Moscow region
• call St. Petersburg and region

Save or share the link on social networks

- FREE for a lawyer!

Write your question, our lawyer will prepare an answer for FREE and call you back in 5 minutes.

By submitting data you agree to the Consent to PD processing, PD Processing Policy and User Agreement

Useful information on the topic

2

How to restore a death certificate

A death certificate is one of the first documents required by a notary...

4

The moment of accepting the inheritance

The moment of taking possession of hereditary property is a controversial concept and...

11

Buying an apartment received by inheritance

Buying an apartment is a responsible, long-awaited event for many, and it...

9

Agreement on the division of inherited property between heirs

There are often cases when, after the death of the testator, his successors receive a joint...

6

What to do next after inheriting

The responsible process of registering an inheritance is left behind, and the successors are already ready...

3

Is inheritance considered joint property?

In modern realities, an inheritance received is the main opportunity for a valuable acquisition...