A claim to avoid obstacles in the use of property. Counter statement of claim on non-obstruction in the use of residential premises. The vindication claim will be upheld in the event
Do you think you are Russian? Born in the USSR and think that you are Russian, Ukrainian, Belarusian? No. This is wrong.
You are actually Russian, Ukrainian or Belarusian. But you think you are a Jew.
Game? Wrong word. The correct word is "imprinting".
The newborn associates himself with those facial features that he observes immediately after birth. This natural mechanism is inherent in most living creatures with vision.
For the first few days, newborns in the USSR saw their mother for a minimum of feeding time, and most of the time they saw the faces of the hospital staff. By a strange coincidence, they were (and still are) mostly Jewish. The reception is wild in its essence and effectiveness.
All your childhood you wondered why you live surrounded by non-native people. Rare Jews on your way could do anything with you, because you were drawn to them, and others were repelled. And even now they can.
You cannot fix this - imprinting is one-time and for life. It is difficult to understand this, the instinct took shape when you were still very far from the ability to formulate. Since that moment, no words or details have survived. Only facial features remained in the depths of my memory. Those traits that you consider to be your own.
3 commentsSystem and Observer
Let's define a system as an object, the existence of which is beyond doubt.
An observer of a system is an object that is not part of the system he observes, that is, it determines its existence, including through factors independent of the system.
From the point of view of the system, the observer is a source of chaos - both control actions and the consequences of observational measurements that do not have a causal relationship with the system.
An internal observer is a potentially achievable object for the system in relation to which inversion of observation and control channels is possible.
An external observer is even a potentially unattainable object for the system, located beyond the event horizon of the system (spatial and temporal).
Hypothesis No. 1. All-seeing eye
Let's assume that our universe is a system and it has an external observer. Then observational measurements can occur, for example, with the help of "gravitational radiation" penetrating the universe from all sides from the outside. The capture cross-section of "gravitational radiation" is proportional to the mass of the object, and the projection of the "shadow" from this capture onto another object is perceived as an attractive force. It will be proportional to the product of the masses of objects and inversely proportional to the distance between them, which determines the density of the "shadow".
The capture of "gravitational radiation" by an object increases its chaos and is perceived by us as the passage of time. An object that is opaque for "gravitational radiation", the capture cross section of which is larger than the geometric size, looks like a black hole inside the universe.
Hypothesis No. 2. Internal observer
It is possible that our universe is observing itself. For example, with the help of pairs of quantum entangled particles spaced apart in space as standards. Then the space between them is saturated with the probability of the existence of the process that generated these particles, reaching the maximum density at the intersection of the trajectories of these particles. The existence of these particles also means that there is no sufficiently large capture cross section on the trajectories of objects to absorb these particles. The rest of the assumptions remain the same as for the first hypothesis, except:
Time flow
Outside observation of an object approaching the event horizon of a black hole, if the “external observer” is the determining factor of time in the universe, will slow down exactly twice - the black hole's shadow will block exactly half of the possible trajectories of “gravitational radiation”. If the “inner observer” is the determining factor, then the shadow will block the entire trajectory of interaction and the flow of time for an object falling into a black hole will completely stop for a view from the side.
Also, the possibility of combining these hypotheses in one proportion or another is not excluded.
The form of the document "A claim for unhindered obstacles" belongs to the heading "Statement of claim". Save the link to the document in in social networks or download it to your computer.
In the _______________ city court of the __________ region
The address: _______________________________
Plaintiff: ____________________________
Claimant's representative: ______________
The address:_____________________________
Defendant: _________________________
The address: ______________________________
Statement of claim
on non-obstruction of use, determination of the order of use or allocation of a share in kind
I, _____________________, year of birth _________, own 1/3 share in the right of common shared ownership of a residential building located at: _______________________________, which is confirmed by a certificate of state registration of rights dated _______ _________. This residential building is a 1-storey residential building with a total area of ____ sq.m.
Also, I own 1/3 of the share in the right of common shared ownership of a land plot with a total area of _______ sq.m. on which the said residential building is located, which is confirmed by a certificate of state registration of rights dated ________ __________. The specified land plot is the land of the settlement and is intended for running a personal subsidiary farm.
The specified shares in the right of common shared ownership of residential premises and land were inherited from my aunt - _________________________, who died on __________, which is confirmed by the Certificate of the right to inheritance under the law dated _________ ____ No. _________.
The remaining shares of this residential building and land plot belonged to my brothers - ___________________ __________ b. and ___________________ ________ year of birth, 1/3 share each.
G. I, _________ having waived the preemptive right to purchase (Article 250 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation), gave my consent to the sale by my brothers - ______________ and ____________ of their shares in the right of common shared ownership of a residential building and a land plot (a copy of the notarized consent is attached).
So, at present, the owner of the sold 2/3 shares of a residential building and a land plot located at the address: _______________________________ is a citizen of ____________
Together with me, 1/3 of this site and a residential building was used by my wife - _____________ ________ year of birth.
After a citizen of _________ became the owner of 2/3 of the shares of the above house, actions are constantly carried out on his part that prevent me, as an owner, from exercising my ownership rights to own, use and dispose of my property.
So, __________ does not allow me to enter the territory of the land plot belonging to me, to enter and quietly live in my own house. At the same time, conflicts constantly occur between us regarding the current situation. Moreover, a citizen of __________ has a spouse who also prevents me and my wife from freely using and disposing of my property. Recently, my wife, ___________, at the next attempt to enter the indicated area and into the house, was beaten by my wife ____________, which is confirmed by a certificate from the police (I attach a copy of the certificate).
Moreover, _________ without notifying me, ___________, as the second owner, redeveloped this living space.
__________, I have already applied to the department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia in the Solnechnogorsk District, with the requirement to initiate a criminal case against ______________ for committing a crime under Art. 330 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, to which he was refused (I attach a copy of the decision on the refusal to initiate a criminal case).
Thus, from the described circumstances, it is clear that relations between our families are quite aggravated, tense and gradually develop into conflicts and even fights.
Numerous attempts to enter the territory of my own site and residential building were unsuccessful, due to the constant obstruction of me from this by ___________
Currently, I, ________________, being the owner of 1/3 of the share of the house and land plot, is deprived of the opportunity to exercise my rights to own and use the specified property, moreover, I am even deprived of the actual opportunity to sell my shares. The impossibility of selling these shares is due to the fact that I cannot provide potential buyers with the opportunity to properly inspect this site and the house.
So, in accordance with Art. 35 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the right to private property is protected by law.
Everyone has the right to own property, own, use and dispose of it both individually and jointly with other persons.
No one can be deprived of their property except by a court decision.
Also, in accordance with Art. 3 of the RF Housing Code, no one can be evicted from the home or restricted in the right to use the home.
Moreover, on the basis of Art. 304 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the owner can demand the elimination of any violations of his rights, even if these violations were not connected with the deprivation of ownership.
Based on Art. 209 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the owner owns the rights to own, use and dispose of his property.
In accordance with Art. 244 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, property owned by two or more persons belongs to them on the basis of the right of common ownership.
By virtue of Art. 247 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the possession and use of property in shared ownership is carried out by agreement of all its participants, and if no agreement is reached, in the manner established by the court.
A participant in shared ownership has the right to provide in his possession and use a part of the common property, commensurate with his share, and if this is impossible, he has the right to demand from other participants who own and use the property attributable to his share, appropriate compensation.
In accordance with clause 6 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated 06/10/1980 No. 4 "On some issues of the practice of consideration by courts of disputes arising between participants in common ownership of a residential building", the allocation of a share belonging to a common property participant means the transfer of a certain an isolated part of a residential building and economic buildings corresponding to its share, and also means the loss of the right to this share in the common property
When establishing the procedure for using a house (Article 247 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation), each of the co-owners is transferred for use a specific part of the building based on his share in the common ownership of the house. In this case, the right to common ownership of the house does not terminate.
When resolving such a requirement, the court takes into account the actual procedure for using the property, which may not exactly correspond to the shares in the common property right, the need for each of the owners in this property and the real possibility of joint use.
So, in accordance with Art. 252 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, property in shared ownership can be divided between its participants by agreement between them.
A participant in shared ownership has the right to demand the separation of his share from the common property.
If the participants in shared ownership fail to reach an agreement on the method and conditions for the division of common property or the separation of a share of one of them, the participant in shared ownership shall have the right to judicially demand the separation in kind of his share from the common property.
If the separation of a share in kind is not permitted by law or is impossible without disproportionate damage to property in common ownership, the emerging owner has the right to pay him the value of his share by other participants in shared ownership.
The disproportionality of the property allocated in kind to a participant in shared ownership on the basis of this article, his share in the ownership right is eliminated by payment of the appropriate sum of money or other compensation.
Also, please note that I, ____________ not possessing legal knowledge and skills, had to resort to the help of professional lawyers to resolve this conflict situation, and therefore I incurred expenses in the amount of ____________________________ to pay for their services.
These expenses were actually incurred by me and are confirmed by the following payment documents __________
All legal services stipulated by the agreement were rendered to me with high quality, in good faith and in full.
Based on the aforesaid and guided by Article. 131 132 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation
1. To oblige the Respondent not to obstruct the Claimant in the use, possession and disposal of the living quarters and the land plot located at the address: ________________________________________;
2. Determine the procedure for the use of residential premises and land plot taking into account the actually established order of use and shares in the right of common shared ownership;
3. Allocate to the Claimant his 1/3 share in the right of common ownership of land and residential premises in kind;
Application:
1. A copy of the representative's power of attorney;
2. A copy of the certificate of state registration of the right to land;
3. A copy of the certificate of state registration of the right to residential premises;
4. A copy of the Consent to Waiver of the Preemptive Right of Purchase;
5. A copy of the certificate of the right to inherit by law;
6. A copy of the decision to refuse to initiate a criminal case;
7. A copy of the police certificate;
" "__________ G. _________________________________________
-
It is no secret that office work negatively affects both the physical and mental state of the employee. There are quite a few facts confirming both this and that.
To the Chekhov City Court
Moscow region
142300, Chekhov, st. Chekhov, 24
Plaintiff:
Machuchin Nikolay Alexandrovich
Defendant:
Moiseeva Ekaterina Nikolaevna
Address: Moscow region, Chekhov, st. Mira, 10, apt. 103
State duty: 200 rubles.
STATEMENT OF CLAIM
On overcoming obstacles in the use of living quarters
I, Machuchin Nikolai Aleksandrovich, am the tenant of a living space (two-room apartment) located at the address: Moscow region, Chekhov, st. Mira, 10, apt. 103.
In addition to me, this dwelling is currently also registered:
- Davydova Yulia Alexandrovna, born 02/07/1972, ex-wife;
- Moiseeva Ekaterina Nikolaevna, born on April 21, 1990, daughter, defendant in this claim.
The controversial living space is an apartment with a total area of 42.8 sq. m., residential - 27.4 sq. m., consisting of 2 isolated rooms.
Since November 2010, I have not had access to this dwelling due to a conflict with the defendant.
All the ways to resolve the issue of removing obstacles to the use of the apartment, peacefully, have led nowhere.
Defendant Moiseeva E.N. hinders my access to the apartment by knocking new locks into the apartment door and not giving me the keys.
Moreover, the defendant lives in this dwelling with her roommate, who is not registered there.
In this regard, I cannot exercise my right to use this living space.
In accordance with Art. 67 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation, a tenant of a dwelling under a social tenancy agreement is obliged:
1) use the dwelling for its intended purpose and within the limits established by this Code;
2) ensure the safety of the living quarters;
3) maintain the proper condition of the living quarters;
4) carry out current repairs of living quarters;
5) make timely payments for residential premises and utilities;
6) inform the lessor, within the time frame established by the contract, about the change in the grounds and conditions that give the right to use the residential premises under the social tenancy contract.
By virtue of Art. 17 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation, residential premises are intended for citizens to live.
The use of the living quarters is carried out taking into account the observance of the rights and legitimate interests citizens living in this dwelling, neighbors, fire safety requirements, sanitary and hygienic, environmental and other legal requirements, as well as in accordance with the rules for the use of living quarters approved by the authorized Government Russian Federation federal executive body.
The relationship between me and the defendant was complicated, and therefore we had a problem with free access to the apartment.
In accordance with Art. 151 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, if a citizen has suffered moral harm (physical or mental suffering) by actions that violate his personal non-property rights or encroach on other intangible benefits belonging to the citizen, as well as in other cases provided for by law, the court may impose on the violator the obligation of monetary compensation for this harm ...
When determining the amount of compensation for moral damage, the court takes into account the degree of guilt of the offender and other circumstances worthy of attention. The court must also take into account the degree of physical and mental suffering associated with individual characteristics the person who is harmed.
The actions of the defendant caused me non-pecuniary damage, the compensation for which I estimate at 30,000 (thirty thousand) rubles.
Based on the above, guided by art. Art. 17, 67 ZhK RF, 151 CC RF,
1. To oblige the defendant, Ekaterina Nikolaevna Moiseeva, not to obstruct me in using the living quarters located at the address: Moscow region, Chekhov, st. Mira, 10, apt. 103.
2. To oblige the defendant Ekaterina Nikolaevna Moiseeva to give me the keys to the locks of the front door for my free access to the living quarters.
3. To recover from the defendant Ekaterina Nikolaevna Moiseeva in my favor compensation for moral damage in the amount of 30,000 (Thirty thousand) rubles 00 kopecks.
Application:
1. Copy of the statement of claim - 1 copy.
2. Copy of the social employment contract - 2 copies.
3. Copy of an extract from the house book - 2 copies.
4. Copy of an extract from the house book - 2 copies.
5. Receipt of payment of state duty.
"" __________ 2010 _________ / N.A. Machuchin /
Claims to avoid obstacles in the use of residential premises are among the most frequent disputes in the field of housing law. Forced flatmates deliberately spoil common property, create unsanitary conditions, change locks, “forget” to give new keys, or constantly provoke conflicts. As a rule, it is almost impossible to resolve such a dispute peacefully: sometimes real battles with fights and calling the police happen between the owners / tenants of housing. The only way to achieve justice in such a situation is a lawsuit. Moreover, such statements are often bundled with other requirements, for example, on the allocation of shares or on the recognition of property rights during inheritance.
Evidence is everything
Emotional statements and wordy descriptions of the situation are not considered by the court as evidence. On the contrary, they can aggravate the situation by creating a negative impression of the plaintiff. Therefore, before filing a claim, it is worth recording facts indicating that you are not allowed into the apartment or create unbearable living conditions.
Evidence includes:
- appeals to the district police officer or the police;
- calling the Emergencies Ministry brigade to open the front door;
- drawing up an act stating that access to housing is closed (the document is drawn up by the management company);
- pre-trial request to eliminate the violation (sent by registered mail);
- testimony of neighbors on the site and entrance.
The most effective measure is to call the police. Law enforcement officials cannot move you into the apartment, but they will collect materials reflecting all the circumstances of the conflict, and receive testimony from its participants. As a rule, in the end, you will be refused to initiate a criminal case, but you will receive the necessary evidence.
Arbitrage practice
In lawsuits to avoid obstacles in the use of residential premises, the courts most often take the side of the plaintiff. The result of the consideration of the case may be:
- agreement on the procedure for the use of residential premises (if it has not been concluded before);
- allocation of a share in kind (if possible);
- conclusion of separate agreements with the management company (section of personal accounts);
- payment of compensation (if the share of the plaintiff in the common property is insignificant);
- the decision to evict third parties from the premises (if the room was rented out or given for temporary use to strangers);
- the decision to vacate the premises (if it was crammed with someone else's furniture or littered).
An important role is played by the basis on which you are in the apartment. Thus, the procedure for the use of premises cannot be established in housing occupied under a social tenancy agreement. This item is only relevant for shared ownership.
Housing Lawyer Services
In such housing disputes, defendants often file counterclaims - for example, to declare an opponent to have lost the right to use the housing or to evict. The justification is that the plaintiff left of his own free will, did not participate in paying bills, did not appear in the apartment. In such a situation, it can be difficult to defend your rights, especially if you do not have knowledge of housing law and are in difficult relationships with your neighbors.
Save your time and nerves - hand the case over to experienced lawyers. Already at the first consultation, our specialists will objectively assess your situation and offer several options for action. Call us - we will definitely help!
SOLUTION
IN THE NAME OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION
Khoroshevsky District Court of Moscow, composed of the presiding judge Yablokova E.A. at the secretary of the court session Malofeev A.V., having examined in an open court session the civil
case No. 2-2079 / 2016 by
claim Novikov V.E. to V.E. Novikov on the non-obstruction of the use of the living quarters, the obligation to hand over the keys to the front door,
INSTALLED:
Plaintiff Novikov V.E. went to court with a claim against the defendant Novikov V.E.
with the requirements for non-overcoming of obstacles by the minor A.V. Novikova and her legal representatives V.E. Novikova, and N.O. Ledneva in the use of the disputed living quarters, to restore the locking devices of the front door of the disputed apartment and hand over a set of keys from the front door to the plaintiff.
In support of the stated requirements, he explained that Novikov V.E. on the right of ownership belongs to the *** share of the apartment located at the address: ***, on the basis of the decision of the Horoshevsky District Court of Moscow dated 05.06.2014, the minor A.L. Novikova. , whose interests are represented by the plaintiff, belongs by right of ownership *** to the share of the disputed apartment.
Defendant Novikovym The.E. obstacles are put in place for the legal representatives of the minor Novikova A.The. in the exercise of the rights of the legal representative of the minor, Novikova A.L. in terms of the use of the controversial residential premises. The plaintiff, the legal representative of the minor, was evicted from the disputed apartment according to the court decision. The mother of a minor, Ledneva N.O., was convicted by the verdict of the Nagatinsky District Court of Moscow dated October 23, 2015, to one year of imprisonment in a general regime correctional colony. In order to execute the decision of the Horoshevsky District Court in the civil case No. 2-3250 / 2015, to help the plaintiff in caring for her young daughter, the minor's grandmother Novikova A.The. - Kudina N.Yu. Since Novikova A.The. An operation was performed in *** year, she needs constant care. On December 29, 2015, the plaintiff was unable to get into the disputed apartment, since the door locks were damaged. Repeated negotiations with the defendant, including with the participation of the police, did not lead to positive outcome On January 7, 2016, the plaintiff attempted to move his minor daughter into the apartment, after negotiations, the plaintiff was able to get into the apartment, finding that his personal property was gone. In this regard, the plaintiff filed statements about the theft of property. During the trial, the plaintiff's claims were clarified in connection with the introduction by the defendant of unauthorized persons without the plaintiff's consent; for their access to the apartment, the locks on the front door were dismantled. The plaintiff, clarifying the claim, asked to oblige V.E. Novikov. not to obstruct the use of the controversial living quarters, restore the locking devices of the front door of the controversial apartment and hand over a set of keys from the front door to legal representatives Novikova A.The.
The plaintiff appeared at the hearing and insisted on the satisfaction of the specified claims.
The defendant did not appear at the hearing, was notified, ensured the appearance of a representative by proxy Stepanova E.A. , who appeared at the hearing, objected to the satisfaction of the stated requirements on the grounds set out in the objections to the claim, asked to refuse the claim in full.
Other persons did not appear at the court session, they were notified, the reasons for the failure to appear of these persons were recognized by the court as disrespectful,
the case was considered by the court at
this turnout in the order of Part 3 of Art. ...
The court, after hearing the explanations of the persons involved in the case, having studied the case materials, comes to the following.
When the parents exercise their powers to manage the property of the child, they are subject to the rules established by civil legislation in relation to the disposal of the ward's property (article). The child has no ownership right to the parents' property, the parents do not have the ownership right to the child's property. Children and parents living together can own and use each other's property by mutual agreement.
DECIDED
In meeting the claims Novikova The.E. to V.E. Novikov about not obstructing the use of the living quarters, the obligation to hand over the keys to the front door - to refuse.
The decision can be appealed to the Moscow City Court through the Khoroshevsky District Court of Moscow within one month from the date of the final decision of the court.
The plaintiff went to court with a claim against the defendants with the above claim, referring to the fact that she is the owner of the share of the apartment ** d. ** cor. ** on the street. *** in Moscow. The ownership of the shares of the apartment belongs to the defendant Makarov A.A. Danno ...
The plaintiff went to court with a claim against the defendants for eviction. It refers to the fact that the defendants are registered at the place of residence in rooms No. \\ and No. \\ in the apartment at the address: \\. \\ by the order of the Prefect of the SZAO of Moscow to the defendants as those on the waiting list for the district ...
