The Krasnodar administration appealed the decision of the regional arbitration court about recognition null and void lease agreement for a land plot with “Peresvet-Region-Krasnodar”. Earlier, the arbitration court granted the suit of the prosecutor's office, insisting that the boundaries of the plot were overlaid on the territory of the reservoir and the developer used it illegally. If the decision remains in force, the mayor's office will have to return the developer a rent of about 70 million rubles, and 74 equity holders can remain without apartments. Lawyers expect that the proceedings can be delayed due to ambiguous norms of legislation on the use of adjacent territories near water.
The Krasnodar mayor's office appealed to the Arbitration Court of the region with the intention of protesting the decision of March 17, 2017 about recognition null and void agreement between the city administration and “Peresvet-Region-Krasnodar” about the lease of a land plot on Kurortnaya st., 3. According to it, the developer must return the land to the mayor's office, where 14 of the 18 floors of the first stage of the “Kurortny Bereg” house are already built, and the administration should return the rental fee for five years - about 70 million rubles. The reason for the decision was the court's decision that the boundaries of the built-up land plot were partially superimposed on the water surface of the “Karasun No. 2” pond and fall onto the coastal strip of public use, which contradicts the norms of the water and land codes. The land plot was transferred to “Peresvet-Region-Krasnodar” by the results of trades in February 2012. In December of the same year, the Krasnodar Territory Prosecutor's Office filed a lawsuit in arbitration demanding to recognize the transaction as null and void. After the refusal she appealed to the Arbitration Court of the North Caucasus District, which returned the case to the first instance, where the claim of the prosecutor's office was satisfied.
According with the SPARK-Interfax system, the charter capital of “Peresvet-Region-Krasnodar” is 10 thousand rubles. At the end of 2015 (the last financial report submitted), the company's loss amounted to 200 thousand rubles. The company is 100% owned by General Director Nikolai Petrikov. As Mr. Petrikov informed Kommersant, the company has a valid construction permit, and the land plot was demarcated and put on cadastral records in 2008. According to Mr. Petrikov, earlier a group of companies under his leadership had already mastered the right bank of the “Karasun No. 2” reservoir, having built a residential complex for 834 apartments and performing works on shore protection with the construction of the embankment. The same types of work planned to be performed on the left bank. In accordance with the agreement on the lease of the land plot with the mayor's office, the company participated in financing the completion of the construction of problematic equity facilities in the JUM and near the Dmitrievskaya dam. "So, if the contract is found to be insignificant, then residents of the house along Rozhdestvenskaya Naberezhnaya Street, 37, will have to return us 41 million rubles, residents of the house along Rozhdestvenskaya Naberezhnaya Street, 39, - 9 million rubles, and residents of the house along Dmitrievskaya Dam, 10, - 24.5 million rubles. There will be about 700 more defendants in this case, "- says Nikolai Petrikov. According to him, the funds have already been invested in 74 equity holders, if the court allows work to continue, the company will complete the object by the end of 2017.
According to Andrey Ilyin, the chief architect of “Peresvet-Region-Krasnodar”, it is impossible to talk about any imposition of a land plot on the water surface, since Karasunsky ponds have not yet been entered in the state water register and their borders are not spelled out in any document. In the Ministry of Natural Resources of Krasnodar region, Kommersant reported that any decisions concerning the Karasuns are within the competence of the mayor's office, since in 2014 the Soviet district court recognized them as ponds. "Ownership, use and disposal of such water bodies belongs to the powers of local self-government bodies," the ministry commented.
The city administration insists that, as the construction of the embankment was planned, there is no violation of the law. "The reference of the court of first instance to the impossibility of concluding a lease agreement for a land plot located in the coastal zone contradicts article 39.8, paragraph 4, of the Land Code of the Russian Federation, providing for the conclusion of such a contract, provided that citizens have free access to the public water object and its coastal strip," commented in the legal administration of the mayoralty.
Konstantin Serdyukov, head of private law practice National Law Company “Mitra”, believes that the dispute was because of the imperfection of laws. "The norms of land and water legislation contain very fuzzy rules on the question of who owns land occupied by water bodies, and who and in what order can dispose of them. The decision of the Arbitration Court of the Krasnodar region, adopted at the second hearing, is unlikely to put an end to the dispute. Doubtful is not only the decision of the court regarding the return of a land plot that includes the coast strip, but also the court's silence on the fate of the rights of pledgeholders - participants in shared construction, "the expert commented to Kommersant.
Materials were taken from “Kommersant”
