Real Estate Disputes and Challenging Transactions

THE DEAL IS ALREADY DONE

Dissatisfaction with the Result of a Transaction and a Ground for Its Cancellation Are Not the Same Thing

Real estate disputes often arise after the agreement has already been signed, the money transferred, the title registered and the object actually passed to the other party.

One of the participants may claim that:

• they did not understand the meaning of their actions;
• they were misled;
• they acted under the influence of fraud;
• they did not receive the money;
• they did not grant authority for the sale;
• the power of attorney was used incorrectly;
• the terms of the transaction differed from the arrangements;
• the property was alienated without their actual will.

But a mere statement of unfairness or dissatisfaction with the transaction does not yet determine the outcome of the court case. It is necessary to establish the legal ground of the claims and check what confirms it.

DEFENSE OF THE RESPONDENT

Our Task Is Not to Allow the Transaction to Be Cancelled Only on the Basis of a New Version of Events

After the sale of real estate, a party to the transaction sometimes changes its position and, months or years later, claims that the circumstances were completely different.

In such a dispute it is important to reconstruct the chronology:

• which documents were signed;
• which authority was granted;
• what the parties discussed;
• how the settlements were made;
• what happened with the registration of title;
• which messages and letters have been preserved;
• how the parties behaved after the transaction;
• whether the person tried to revoke the power of attorney or stop the registration;
• whether similar claims between the parties were considered earlier.

We gather these circumstances into a single evidentiary position and defend the validity of the transaction.

POSITION OF THE CLAIMANT

First It Is Necessary to Determine Not Why the Transaction Seems Unfair, but the Legal Ground and the Evidence

Before going to court, we check which specific circumstance may have legal significance. It is not enough to simply state: “I changed my mind”; “I expected something different”; “I was promised”; “I did not get the expected result”. It is necessary to determine a specific ground for challenging the transaction and to understand by what evidence it can be confirmed. If there is no sufficient evidentiary base, the client should learn about this before a long court process begins.

The Outcome of the Case Is Often Determined by Documents That Appeared Long Before the Court

When analyzing the dispute, we study, depending on the situation:

• the agreement and its annexes;
• notarial documents;
• powers of attorney;
• settlement documents;
• bank transactions;
• receipts;
• the parties’ correspondence;
• email and messages;
• Rosreestr documents and EGRN records;
• the history of the transfer of rights;
• the circumstances of signing the documents;
• medical documents, if a party refers to its condition;
• the parties’ actions after the transaction;
• applications to revoke a power of attorney;
• prohibitions and restrictions on registration actions;
• previously issued court acts.

Not every document is needed in every dispute. The composition of the evidence is determined by the specific ground and the actual situation.

We Separately Check Transactions Concluded through a Representative

If the real estate was sold or acquired by a representative, the following may be important:

• the content of the power of attorney;
• the scope of the granted authority;
• its validity period;
• notarial certification;
• the circumstances of its issue;
• whether the power of attorney was revoked;
• whether the participants knew about its revocation;
• whether the representative’s actions corresponded to the granted authority.

The mere existence of a power of attorney does not exclude a dispute. But the principal’s subsequent disagreement with the result of the transaction does not by itself mean its invalidity.

The Phrase “I Was Deceived” Is Not Enough

If a party claims that it concluded the transaction under the influence of fraud or material misrepresentation, the court assesses the specific circumstances. It is important to establish:

• what the alleged fraud consisted of;
• what information the party received;
• what circumstances were allegedly concealed from it;
• what it understood when signing the documents;
• how much these circumstances influenced the decision to conclude the transaction;
• whether this version is confirmed by documents and the party’s own conduct.

That is why a position cannot be built only on an emotional description of the conflict.

A Diagnosis and the Inability to Understand the Meaning of a Transaction Are Different Questions

In some cases, one of the parties claims that at the moment of signing the agreement or power of attorney it could not understand the meaning of its actions or control them. In such disputes, it is necessary to assess the person’s condition precisely in the legally significant period. The mere existence of an illness, treatment, a difficult life situation or psychological stress does not yet answer the question of whether the person understood the content of a specific document at the moment of signing it. That is why evidence relating to the relevant period is especially important here.

A Dispute over Money Does Not Always Mean the Invalidity of the Agreement

After the transaction, a separate conflict may arise over whether the money was transferred and in what amount. But a dispute over settlements and a dispute over the validity of the transaction itself are not always the same legal question.

We check:

• what is written in the agreement;
• whether receipts exist;
• whether bank documents exist;
• what statements the parties made;
• how the agreement was actually performed;
• which claim actually corresponds to the situation that has arisen.

This makes it possible not to mix different methods of protection and to correctly determine the subject of the court dispute.

If the Dispute Has Already Been Considered, We Begin with the Previous Court Acts

Repeated conflicts around the same real estate require special analysis. If a dispute over a power of attorney, agreement, ownership or the circumstances of a transaction was previously considered between the same participants, it is necessary to determine:

• what exactly the claimant demanded;
• which circumstances the court examined;
• which facts were established;
• whether the decision came into legal force;
• what can and what cannot be proved anew in the new case.

Sometimes the previous court process becomes one of the key elements of the defense in the next dispute.

In Disputes over the Invalidity of a Transaction, the Deadline Cannot Be Checked “Approximately”

Before filing a claim or preparing a defense, we separately check the deadlines for going to court.

The following may matter:

• the type of the stated ground;
• the date of the transaction;
• the start of its performance;
• the moment when the person learned or should have learned of the circumstances it refers to;
• previous court proceedings.

That is why the question of the deadline is assessed in relation to the specific claim and the facts of the case.

A REAL CASE OF KONSULTANT LAW FIRM

The Claimant Repeatedly Tried to Cancel the Sale of a Share in an Apartment — the Court Refused

In case No. 2-6462/2025, the claimant repeatedly demanded that the purchase and sale agreement for a share in an apartment be declared invalid. It referred to fraud, misrepresentation, the absence of receipt of funds and its condition when signing the documents. Konsultant Law Firm represented the respondents. We used the previously issued court acts, the content of the power of attorney, the correspondence and the sequence of the claimant’s own actions. The court found no evidence of the alleged fraud and misrepresentation and fully refused the claim.

The transaction remained valid.