In Kurgan, the court will review the case of a scandalous construction project in the city center

The developer Gazinvest challenged the decision to confiscate a plot of land issued by the Kurgan mayor’s office for the construction of a high-rise building. The dispute between residents of neighboring houses, the mayor’s office and businessmen should be reviewed in the court of first instance. The information appeared on the website of the Seventh Court of Cassation.

»[Решения судов] on declaring invalid (void) the purchase and sale agreement in relation to the land plot <...>, located at the address: Kurgan, st. K. Myagotina, 117 “A”, termination of the ownership rights of LLC “Specialized Developer “Gazinvest” to the land plot, imposing on it the obligation to return the site to the administration <...> cancel, send the civil case for a new trial to the court of first instance,” says the court ruling. The reason for the cancellation was violations of the law, so it was decided to reconsider the case.

The Court of Cassation found that when determining the fate of the scandalous construction site, the actions of the former owners of the site were incorrectly interpreted. Allegedly, the companies that purchased the site should have conscientiously studied the cadastral plans provided to them and identified possible violations.

The businessmen claimed that they trusted the documents of the city hall, and the construction permit was obtained after all the necessary examinations. Residents of neighboring houses were not notified that part of the disputed public territory was located on land privately owned by businessmen. Also, the deal to purchase land in 2009 was unreasonably canceled due to an erroneous interpretation of the statute of limitations. Taking these arguments into account, the court decided to eliminate the violations and reconsider the case.

Earlier, URA.RU reported that Kurgan residents, who wrote a complaint to President Putin, managed to cancel the construction of a high-rise building in their yard. The dispute, which lasted two years, ended with a decision to seize the site and cancel construction. The businessman challenged the court’s decision.