The State Duma called on the Supreme Court to make a different decision on the case of the apartment Valley

The head of the State Duma Committee on Property, Land and Property Relations, Sergei Gavrilov (CPRF), called on the Supreme Court of Russia to adopt a new plenum resolution on the case of singer, People's Artist of Russia Larisa Dolina.

"The decision of the Second Court of Cassation will be appealed to the Supreme Court of Russia. I would like the new leadership of the Supreme Court to pay attention to this case and give a detailed decision analyzing the refusal of bilateral restitution, comparing this approach with the norms of the Civil Code and the law on compensation to a bona fide acquirer," the parliamentarian told RIA Novosti.

He believes that such a resolution can set a different vector for further practice in housing disputes and show that a bona fide buyer does not bear all the risks of someone else's deception.

"Ideally, the position on such situations should be fixed not only in a separate act, but also in an updated resolution of the plenum, which will provide a clear guideline for the courts when considering secondary housing cases," Gavrilov stressed.

According to the deputy, after the decision of the Second Court of Cassation, this story turned from a private dispute into a demonstration of how the risks in the secondary housing market are currently arranged. The risk of defects in the will is shifted from the seller and his environment to the final buyer.

"At the same time, the design laid down in The Civil Code looks different. The general model of the consequences of the invalidity of the transaction is based on bilateral restitution: each side returns everything received, and if it is impossible to return the item, reimburses its value," Gavrilov recalled.

The refusal of this order is allowed only in narrow cases and the usual purchase and sale of an apartment with payment from legal sources is difficult to fit into such an order, therefore, against this background, the decision in the Dolina case is perceived as a "reversal": the buyer was not only denied the preservation of the right, but also left without a refund of the amount paid.

"Theoretically, the design of the protection of a bona fide acquirer is also connected with the mechanism of compensation at the expense of the treasury: the law on state registration of real estate makes it possible to make a one-time payment if the housing of such an acquirer is still withdrawn and it is not possible to recover losses from specific persons. In practice, the implementation of this rule requires a separate trial, rigorous evidence and a decision on the loss of the apartment that has already entered into force. If the approach applied in the Dolina case becomes entrenched, and in the future the courts will refuse to recognize bilateral restitution and protection of the buyer, it will be more and more difficult to use the compensation mechanism," the deputy suggested.

He recalled that now buyers are invited to build their own safety mechanisms against possible fraudsters and complete zeroing of accumulated money, but any such measures give only partial protection, because the outcome always depends on the judicial assessment of a particular story and on which line the highest authority sets.

As EADaily reported, back in March of this year, the Khamovnichesky court of Moscow returned the apartment to Dolina. The right of ownership of the defendant Polina Lurie to the disputed property has been terminated and recognized for Larisa Dolina. Lurie's counterclaim to evict the singer was rejected by the court.

On November 27, the Second Court of Cassation rejected the complaint of Polina Lurie, who bought the singer's apartment. The ownership of real estate is again abandoned by the Valley. Lurie had the last opportunity to appeal the decision — an appeal to the Supreme Court.

Fraud by analogy with Larisa Dolina's apartment has spread in the Russian real estate market and even got the name "Dolina effect", the corresponding article appeared in Wikipedia is back on November 24. Currently, discussions are continuing about the name of this scheme.