1. The subject of the dispute is the recognition of orders on the transfer of land plots into ownership as invalid, the cancellation of the state registration of ownership rights, and the reclamation of these plots in favor of the state, as the prosecutor’s office believes that the citizens illegally obtained the land, having exercised their right to free privatization repeatedly.
2. The court of cassation established that the appellate court incorrectly applied the norms of procedural law, which made it impossible to establish the factual circumstances that are relevant for the correct resolution of the case, in particular, the issue of the good faith of the acquirer PERSON_1 was not investigated, no attention was paid to the transfer of land plots for lease to the farm enterprise “Hors-KLM,” and the need for simultaneous termination of property rights to the newly created land plot and cancellation of its state registration for the effective protection of violated rights was not taken into account. The court of cassation emphasized that the request to recognize the orders of the StateGeoCadastre Main Directorate as illegal is not a proper way to protect the interests of the state in a dispute over the recovery of property. The court of cassation noted that the appellate court needs to establish whether the last acquirer of the disputed immovable property is bona fide, and whether compensation for the value of the reclaimed property is subject to recovery in favor of the defendant, and its amount. The court of cassation took into account the conclusions of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court, set forth after the filing of the cassation appeal, regarding the need for simultaneous termination of property rights to the newly created land plot and cancellation of its state registration for the effective protection of the rights of the legal owner.
3. The Supreme Court overturned the decision of the appellate court and sent the case for a new trial to the appellate instance.
