1. The subject of the dispute is the recognition of a power of attorney and a land sale agreement as invalid, as well as the recovery of this land plot from someone else’s illegal possession.
2. The court of cassation, overturning the decisions of the previous courts in the part regarding the recognition of the sale agreement as invalid, proceeded from the fact that the signature on the power of attorney was forged, and therefore, the owner’s expression of will to sell the land plot was effectively absent. In such a case, the sale agreement is unexecuted, not invalid. The court refers to the resolution of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court of November 27, 2024, which states that a proper means of protection in such a case is a possessory action, i.e., the recovery of property from someone else’s illegal possession. The court also took into account the practice of the European Court of Human Rights regarding the protection of property rights, in particular, the three-part test for the legitimacy of interference with property rights. The court noted that the recovery of property from a bona fide acquirer is a proportionate measure, since the legal owner has priority in the protection of their rights, and the bona fide acquirer may demand compensation for damages from the unscrupulous seller.
3. The court of cassation overturned the decisions of the previous courts in the part regarding the recognition of the sale agreement as invalid, denied the satisfaction of this claim, changed the decision in the part regarding the recovery of property, indicating that it is subject to recovery in favor of the successors of the plaintiff, and left the decision unchanged in the other part.
