This is an empty menu. Please make sure your menu has items.
Business Duty Officer

Conscientiousness purchaser : how not to be left without the acquired property?

Conscientiousness purchaser : how not to be left without the acquired property?

Article 302 The Civil Code of the Russian Federation establishes the procedure for actions in case of, if the buyer has purchased the property from the seller, who didn't have a right to sell.

conscientiousness plays a big role in this situation:

  • добросовестный приобретатель — это лицо, who didn't know and couldn't know that, what buys somethinh from the seller, who didn't have a right to sell (was not the owner of the goods)

If the acquirer is bona fide, the real owner of the property cannot demand from them the return of the property

  • недобросовестный приобретатель — лицо, who knew or should have known that, what buys somethinh from the seller, who is not entitled to sell it

If the acquirer is dishonest, the real owner of the property has the right to demand his property from such a buyer

In connection with these provisions of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, let's consider the criteria of conscientiousness , which were formed in judicial practice:

  • conscientiousness is refuted, if at the time of the transaction for the acquisition of property the right of ownership in the register was not registered in the name of the seller or there was a note about the legal dispute
  • conscientiousness is refuted, when the focus of the transaction on the withdrawal of property from circulation is revealed in order to prevent the foreclosure of creditors (if the acquirer knew about the seller's bankruptcy)
  • if the acquirer relied on the data of the state register, they're considered conscientiousness until then, until it's proven, that they knew that the person didn't have the right to sell, which is listed in the registry as the owner of
  • conscientiousness is confirmed, if, when acquiring property, the buyer made sure, that the ownership tof the property was registered to the seller, there were no restrictions in the form of prohibitions on the transaction, there were no law enforcement contacts established , the fact of payment and transfer of the property is confirmed by the relevant financial documents and the act of acceptance of the required property

To conclude: Courts refute conscientiousness, if the acquirer didn't take reasonable steps, that they should've done, when acquiring property, for example, didn't use data from public sources (state registry or resources , that provide an auto report), did not pay attention to the short period of time the disputed property was in the possession of the seller, didn't take other steps that he should have taken when entering into the contract. .

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Other news

Share this info. Choose a social media!

pro bono consultation