Real estate disputes
Protected a transaction with a share in an apartment from a repeated attempt to declare it invalid
The claimant repeatedly tried to challenge the sale of a share in an apartment. He claimed that he had issued a power of attorney under the influence of fraud and mistake, had not received the money for the property and, because of his condition, did not understand the meaning of his actions. Konsultant Law Firm represented the defendants. We showed that the claimant knew about the upcoming sale, did not revoke the power of attorney and did not present evidence of fraud. The court dismissed the claim in full — the transaction remained in force.
The claimant tried to undo an already completed sale of a share
The claimant was the owner of a share in the apartment.
He issued a power of attorney for the sale.
The share was sold.
He went to court, citing: not receiving the money, being misled, a promise of another apartment, a painful condition and not understanding the meaning of his actions.
Konsultant Law Firm represented the defendants and sought to preserve the transaction.
Under the contract, the price of the share was RUB 950,000
The contract specified the price of RUB 950,000.
It was recorded that the payment was made in cash before signing.
The claimant claimed that he had not received the money.
Repeated challenge
Previously, the claimant had already tried to declare the power of attorney and the transaction invalid
The dispute had already been considered.
The claim was dismissed.
The result was upheld on appeal and in the Eighth Cassation Court of General Jurisdiction.
The circumstances had prejudicial significance.
In the second dispute, the claimant focused on fraud and mistake
It is not enough to state “I was deceived”.
It is necessary to confirm: what information was communicated, who communicated it, what was concealed, how the fraud affected the will, and why without it the transaction would not have been concluded.
The claimant did not present evidence of fraud.
Written evidence
The correspondence showed that the claimant knew about the upcoming sale
The correspondence took place while the claimant was in a correctional facility.
It mentioned the power of attorney, the right to sell the share and the intention to dispose of it.
The version about not understanding was not confirmed.
Knowing about the sale, the claimant did not revoke the power of attorney before the transaction
He did not apply to a notary to cancel it.
He did not establish a ban on registration actions.
The issue was raised only after the sale.
The mere presence of illnesses did not prove the inability to understand the meaning of one’s actions
References to opioid dependence and psychological depression were made.
By themselves, they do not confirm a lack of understanding.
The content was explained by the notary.
The court found no confirmation of the deliberate misleading of the claimant
No fraud, material mistake, inconsistency of will or deliberate misleading was established.
Previously established circumstances
One cannot endlessly re-prove what has already been established by the court
Preclusion applies.
A new claim does not allow ignoring the established facts.
Result
The court fully dismissed the claim to challenge the transaction
The Sovetsky District Court of Krasnoyarsk found no grounds to declare the sale-purchase contract invalid. The claimant’s claims against the defendants were left unsatisfied.
The real estate transaction remained in force. The claim against our clients was dismissed in full.
A transaction cannot be cancelled only because, over time, one of the parties changed its attitude towards it
It is not enough to say “I did not understand”, “I was deceived”, “I was promised something else” or “I did not receive the money”.
What matters is: the power of attorney, notarial documents, correspondence, behavior, revocation of the power of attorney, previously issued court decisions and evidence of the condition.
It is important to present the result correctly
The contract price is not an amount recovered or “saved” by Konsultant Law Firm
The price was RUB 950,000.
It must NOT be written that “we recovered / preserved / saved RUB 950,000”.
The correct result: the court dismissed the claim to declare the contract invalid, and the transaction remained in force.
In real estate disputes, not only the text of the contract matters, but also the behavior of the parties before and after the transaction
The full picture matters: what was signed, the authority, the notary’s explanations, the discussions, the knowledge of the disposal, the revocation of the power of attorney, what happened after the transaction and the previously considered dispute.
Our role
Konsultant Law Firm represented the defendants.
The case was handled by lawyer Viktor Erofeev.
The work included preserving the transaction and refuting the allegations of fraud, mistake and health condition; the previously issued acts, the power of attorney, the notarial formalization, the correspondence and the behavior were taken into account.
The court fully dismissed the claim.
Case
No. 2-6462/2025
Court
Sovetsky District Court of Krasnoyarsk
UID
24RS0048-01-2025-001235-87
Decision date
23 May 2025
Reasoned text
6 June 2025
Position of Konsultant Law Firm
Defendants
Subject
Challenging a sale-purchase contract for a share in an apartment
Contract price
RUB 950,000
Main arguments of the claimant
Fraud, mistake, failure to receive the money, health condition
Result
The claim was dismissed in full
Representative of the defendants
Viktor Erofeev
Practice Areas
Practices Related to This Case
Managing Partner, Konsultant Law Firm
Nikolay Nemkov
Is a real estate transaction being challenged?
We will check the contract, powers of attorney, notarial documents, correspondence, registration history and previously issued court decisions.