Theory of everything. Perpetual right to use residential premises Recognition of the right to perpetual use of residential premises

In accordance with paragraph 2 of Art. 292 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the transfer of ownership of a residential building or apartment to another person is the basis for termination of the right to use residential premises by family members of the previous owner, unless otherwise provided by law.

According to Art. 19 of the Federal Law "On the entry into force of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation" the effect of the provisions of Part 4 of Art. 31 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation, providing that in the event of termination of family relations with the owner of a residential premises, the right to use this residential premises for a former family member of the owner of this residential premises is not retained, unless otherwise established by agreement between the owner and the former member of his family, does not apply to former members the family of the owner of the privatized residential premises, provided that at the time of privatization of this residential premises, these persons had equal rights to use this premises with the person who privatized it, unless otherwise established by law or agreement.

As follows from Art. 2 of the Law of the Russian Federation dated July 4, 1991 No. 1541-1 “On the privatization of housing stock in the Russian Federation” citizens occupying residential premises in the state or municipal housing stock, including housing stock under the economic management of enterprises or the operational management of institutions (departmental fund) on the terms of social rent, has the right, with the consent of all adult family members living together, as well as minors aged 14 to 18 years, to acquire ownership of these residential premises.

Thus, paragraph 2 of Art. 292 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, since, by giving consent to the privatization of residential premises occupied under a social tenancy agreement, without which it would have been impossible, they proceeded from the fact that the right to use this residential premises for them would be of an indefinite nature and it should be taken into account when transferring the right ownership of residential premises on an appropriate basis to another person (for example, purchase and sale, exchange, donation, rent, inheritance).

Consequently, if a former member of the owner’s family at the time of privatization had equal rights with a person who subsequently acquired ownership of this residential premises, but refused privatization, giving consent to privatization to another person, then when the ownership of the residential premises is transferred to another person, he does not may be evicted from this residential premises, since he has the right to use this residential premises. In this case, it is necessary to proceed from the fact that the right of use is of an indefinite nature.

Eviction of citizens from residential premises falls into categories of cases that are subject to consideration with the mandatory participation of a prosecutor.

Part 2 of Article 320 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation and part 3 of Article 376 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation stipulate that if a prosecutor participated in the consideration of the case, the prosecutor's office has the right to challenge both court decisions that have not entered into legal force and those that have entered into legal force.

In this situation, if a citizen believes that the decision of the court of first instance on the dispute over eviction has violated his rights and legitimate interests, he has the right to apply to the district prosecutor’s office at the location of the court that considered the case on the merits, with a request for the prosecutor to check the legality of the person who has not entered into the legal force of a judicial act of the district court.

If a citizen disagrees with the decision of the court of first instance and the ruling of the judicial panel for civil cases of the St. Petersburg City Court, he has the right, within six months from the date the court decision entered into legal force, to file a cassation appeal with the city prosecutor's office, attaching duly certified copies to the appeal court decisions.

The right to perpetual use of residential premises: subjects of ownership and their rights.

In legal practice, a frequently asked question is: “Who has the right to use residential premises indefinitely?”

According to the norms of federal legislation, the settlement of a person in a house, apartment or other residential premises that is not privatized as a family member is the basis for recognition of his right to perpetual use.

What is the right to perpetual use of residential premises?

The right to perpetual use of premises is the ability of a citizen, guaranteed by the norms of domestic legislation, to live in an apartment or house on a permanent or temporary basis, store his belongings in it, have animals, invite friends, that is, behave like the owner of the house.

There must be grounds for this right to arise. Let's highlight the most important ones:

1. Signing a rental agreement;

2. Conclusion of a contract for the rental of a commercial residential building;

3. Buying an apartment;

4. Privatization of real estate;

5. Direct relationship with the owners of the apartment who gave consent to the citizen for indefinite residence;

6. Signing an agreement on the unlimited use of living space.

It is worth noting that, with the exception of cases of privatization or the signing of a rental agreement, the indefinite use of an apartment is not documented in any way. Registration of place of residence is an administrative act that is necessary for systematic accounting. It is not a factor in the emergence of claims to housing ownership. Therefore, citizens of the Russian Federation often have to prove their constitutional rights in court.

Often people buy an apartment, equip it, make repairs, plan their family future, and then, on the threshold of their ownership, a person appears who has the legal right to live in his home. The former owners simply did not indicate that their relative was living in this apartment indefinitely. A question arises regarding persons who have the right to live in an apartment for life, but not to dispose of it.

1. Relatives, family members who lived in the apartment or house until the moment of privatization and refused the legal transaction. The right of residence for such a person is retained for life, even if the owners have changed several times and the “cohabitant” has a different registration address.

2. Legatees who operate the premises under a testamentary refusal. This means that the grandmother allowed her granddaughter to live in her apartment, but not sell it.

3. Persons, recipients of rent, who live in the house on the basis of a maintenance agreement.
All these persons, according to the norms of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation, have the right to indefinite residence in a house, regardless of their form of ownership.

When is the right to permanent use of residential premises lost?

Own housing or premises of municipal ownership can be “taken away” from an individual for indefinite use. There are a number of factors for this.

The owner of a private premises loses square meters if:

1. The building was remodeled without permission, which may endanger the life of a person or neighbors. If the owner refuses to make repairs back, the court has the right to evict the person and sell the building at auction.

2. The premises are used for other purposes, the rights of neighbors are systematically violated, all actions are aimed at destroying the house or apartment. Initially, the local government authority issues a warning to the owner, and then, if the latter has not taken the necessary measures, the court issues an order to evict him from the house.

Municipal premises may be taken away from permanent possession in the following cases:

1. Departure for permanent residence of a person and change of his place of registration entails the termination of the rights to permanent use of residential premises;

2. Failure to fulfill the obligations of the tenant: lack of utility payments and rent for six months;

3. Damage to living space, destruction, failure to maintain cleanliness and order in it;

4. Violation of the rights of neighbors, which affects their residence;

5. Use of the apartment as an office, store, warehouse.

An individual who is a relative of the owner of the apartment, however, in the event of a combination of circumstances, is forced to break off family relations with him, may be evicted from the apartment. However, if there are minor children (the case of divorce), such a citizen of the Russian Federation can file a lawsuit for violation of constitutional rights. Otherwise, persons who lived in the house but were not its owners lose the right to perpetual possession.

There are a number of decisive factors for this:

1. The apartment was sold to third parties;

2. The citizen used the premises under a testamentary agreement, but violated all the conditions and systematically destroyed the apartment;

3. The contract of unlimited use was terminated. It can be broken before the expiration of the time specified in the contract only in court.