Xinhua news agency (the largest state-owned Chinese news agency)

Core of the Case

The district administration demanded that the client demolish an unauthorized building – a building located on the territory occupied by the client. The building was used as a checkpoint and guard accommodation. The lawyers of Avelan Law Firm were faced with the task of proving to the Administration that the demand for demolition was illegal. The complexity of the project lies in the fact that usually the authorities enter into litigation in such cases, during which clients bear certain costs (and, as a rule, in court, the truth “turns out” to be on the side of the authorities). However, our lawyers were able to resolve this issue out of court.

Scope of Services

Drawing up responses to claims, conducting correspondence, numerous negotiations with representatives of the council, conducting construction and technical expertise, mediating functions.

Achievements, Results, Importance, Significance of the Project

The lawyers of Avelan Law Firm managed to prove to the Administration out of court that this building is not a permanent structure, therefore the demands for demolition are unreasonable.
In particular, the following position was developed:
This object is not an unauthorized construction, since it does not have the features of a capital object and is movable property that does not have a strong connection with the land, and therefore its movement is possible without damage to the object itself.
These circumstances were confirmed by an independent construction and technical expertise.
For this reason, on the basis of Article 130 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the object is not real estate unit.
At the same time, only immovable objects can be recognized as unauthorized construction (clause 29 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation No. 10, the Plenum of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation No. 22 dated 29.04.2010 On Some Issues Arising in Judicial Practice in Resolving Disputes Related to the Protection of Ownership and Other Property Rights).
According to the prevailing all-Russian judicial practice, checkpoints are usually not recognized by courts as immovable objects, and are also not subject to demolition due to their auxiliary importance in the operation of a parking lot and a non-residential building.