The constitutional court ordered to courts of law now the earth
to Regional judges will divide more difficult to evade from the decision of ground problems.
Today publishes the decision of the Constitutional court on the case of check of constitutionality of positions of some points of the Federal law “ About a turn of the earths of agricultural purpose “ in connection with the complaint of citizen L. G.Pogodinoj.
the Woman did not manage in due time to receive a site the area of 17,5 hectares - it under the decision of general meeting of shareholders have given to other proprietor - Joint-Stock Company PH “ Chulkovsky “. Then the declarant has addressed in court of law, but has not found there support, then has addressed in the Constitutional court.
as the Lecturer on the given case judge Gadis Gadzhiev acted. In the exclusive comment for it has informed that in the Law “ About a turn of the earths of agricultural purpose “ It is said that position and borders of concrete sites defines general meeting of shareholders on which should be present not less than 20 percent of proprietors. Voices of participants of meeting are defined by quantity of the earths belonging to them. That does not contradict the Constitution of the Russian Federation. There correspond Constitutions and the right of the large proprietor, that is having some ground shares, to monopolise the right of allocation and distribution of sites. And in this sense of norm of the federal law which were challenged by Lydia Pogodin, are observed completely.
Another matter that legislators and pravoprimeniteli on places are obliged to regulate ground relations taking into account private and public interests. And if general meeting did not manage to come to the co-ordinated decision dispute of proprietors can be resolved in court. Before the present decision of the Constitutional court was accepted, one courts of law considered that can accept to consideration of the appeal of decisions of general meeting of proprietors, other such complaints did not accept, referring that it not in their competence. KS the decision has explained to them that courts can consider decisions of general meeting of shareholders. So Lydia Pogodinoj`s business, no less than other proprietors if they have claims to the decision of the meeting of shareholders, is subject to revision.
For those who intends to follow the lead of Lydia Pogodinoj, Gadis Gadzhiev has explained that procedure vydela a ground share begins that general meeting of proprietors should solve, in what place on the ground area available for them the file will be allocated. Further already from this file sites in a private property should be allocated. If general meeting was not spent to force of any reasons it does not mean that possibility of this or that citizen “ to be allocated “ it is paralysed. “ we in the decision have specified that even if general meeting will not be spent, the citizen has a possibility to realise the right - through court of law, - Gadis Gadzhiev has declared. - but general meeting of shareholders very important “. Its carrying out allows to prevent inexpedient, from the point of view of the majority, allocation of the concrete ground areas, from - for what cost of the earth which have remained in the general property can decrease or its use on a special-purpose designation will be complicated.
“ Present that wishing to be allocated suggests to give it the ground area in the middle of a field. Cost of the remained earth will decrease, and is appreciable. It is necessary to commensurate the general interests and private “ - Gadis Gadzhiev is convinced.
At the same time the leading expert on a turn of the agricultural earths, the Doctor of Economics Natalia Shagajda asserts that the Law “ About a turn of the earths of agricultural purpose “ does not give clear procedures of section of the property. Therefore still it is difficult enough to courts to take out decisions on variety of painful questions for a society.
As a result of land reform 1990 - h years in Russia it was formed 12 million proprietors of a farmland. However in nature sites have not been allocated, therefore a problem “ who the owner “ remains in the preserved kind till now.
Besides it, Natalia Shagajda pays attention that on the decision of a question on ownership of land considerable influence renders not only the Law “ About a turn of the earths of agricultural purpose “ but also others standard and podzakonnye certificates which regulate official registration of papers on the earth. Therefore, according to the expert, one decision of the Constitutional court, let and very correct it is, not enough, essentially to facilitate the introduction of owners of land into the rights.