“The woman decided to register her husband’s place of residence with her, but the employees of the CNAP were refused a woman decided to arrange the place of residence of her husband with her. While communicating with the CNAP employee, she learned that an encumbrance was imposed on the house in the form of a ban on alienation, so they could not register the place of residence of the man at the specified address. This is mentioned […]”, – WRITE: Businessua.com.ua
The woman decided to register a man’s place of residence together with themselves, however, the CNAP employees refused her
The woman decided to decorate the place of residence of the man with her. While communicating with the CNAP employee, she learned that an encumbrance was imposed on the house in the form of a ban on alienation, so they could not register the place of residence of the man at the specified address. This is mentioned in the decision of the Berdychiv City Court of Zhytomyr Region, published on July 25, 2025.
The woman is the owner of the 208/300 part of the apartment building, which is confirmed by the gift of the apartment. According to this agreement, her mother gave her 208/300 parts of an apartment building. The owners of 1/3 of the house are also third parties who do not express independent requirements, in particular, its brothers. In October 2024, the woman appealed to the representatives of the Administrative Services Center of Berdichev to register her husband’s place of residence with her. During the dialogue with the CNAP employee, she learned that the house was encumbered in the form of a ban on alienation, so they were not able to register the place of residence of the man at the specified address. On the basis of the State Register of Real Property Rights, the Register of Property Rights to Real Estate, the Register of Prohibitions of Alienation of Real Estate Objects on 23.03.2006 under No. 3005725, a ban on the alienation of the house imposed by the registrar of Novograd-Volyn state notary was registered. The base for encumbrance is not specified. In connection with the technical error, made on 23.03.2006, during the registration of encumbrance to the Unified Register of Prohibitions of alienation of real estate objects, the registrar was mistakenly indicated Novograd-Volyn State Notary Office of Zhytomyr region instead of the actual registrar, which is the Berdychiv State Notary.
What was the court decision? The woman’s claim was satisfied. The court abolished the encumbrance (prohibition) on the real estate object, namely: the house imposed by the registrar-Berdychiv State Notary Office, the registration number of encumbrance 3005725, registered on 23.03.2006 (date of occurrence of 25.11.1989, No. of the Register 1-1868).
“According to the letter of the Berdychiv State Notary Office of 16.10.2024 under No. 903/01-16, the ban No. 3005725 dated 23.03.2006 (date of occurrence of 25.11.1989, No. of the Register 1-1868), imposed on a residential building. The aforementioned prohibition is absent. Novograd-Vashinsky State Notary Office of Zhytomyr Region was indicated instead of the actual registrar, which is the Berdychiv State Notary Office of Zhytomyr Region. Berdychiv State Notary Office has no legal grounds for independently to remove the ban on the object of real estate, the plaintiff is deprived of the possibility of realizing his rights of the owner of real estate in another way, except for judicial protection. the court.
The gun
Please wait …