[ad_1]
The software does not apologize to the Registration Agency (AB) for issuing an incorrect lien certificate, it is required by law to keep real estate accounts and you must be guided by it and not its information products to ensure legal certainty. This stems from a decision of the Varna Court of Appeal (VAC), which ordered AB to pay compensation to two spouses who lost their homes, with interest and expenses so far exceeding BGN 100,000, Lex reported.
The Supreme Administrative Court upheld the decision of the city district court, which also convicted the agency. However, the appellate judges do not limit themselves to agreeing with the conclusions of the first instance, but they present substantial judgments on the responsibility of the AB and touch on the current problem with the Property Registry, which has been missing in our country for 20 years.
The case for which the agency is about to be convicted is finally from Varna and started in 2003. a man, who is also registered as a sole trader, buys a 63 square meter apartment in the city. In 2006, at the request of his employee, who claimed that he was owed nearly BGN 20,000, the apartment was seized as collateral for the worker’s claim.
In 2013, the apartment was sold to the couple, who are now suing the Registration Agency. Before confessing the transaction, they asked the seller to provide them with an original certificate from the Registry Office in Varna, proving that the property is not encumbered. On February 20, 2013 a certificate was issued that the apartment has no encumbrances.
It is issued because the foreclosure of the apartment is recorded only in the personal account of the seller as sole proprietor, but not in his as an individual, it is not in the account of the property itself. And this has happened, despite the fact that the sole trader is responsible for his obligations to all his assets and as an individual.
In 2015 the spouses sold the property to another woman, retaining a lifetime right of free use of the house.
Meanwhile, in 2011, its first owner’s employee won his wage case, the property was put up for public sale by a private bailiff, and sold in 2019.
Then the husbands lose their right for life of use, and the woman who bought the apartment from them – their property. The three are filing a claim for compensation, since the family wants a total of BGN 81,500, and the new owner of the apartment even more, since after an expert opinion, before the second instance he has already claimed BGN 53,000.
The Varna District Court recognized the claim of both spouses, but rejected that of the new owner, as a new lien certificate was not issued on their transaction.
Dissatisfied, she and the Registry Agency appealed.
Before the Court of Appeal AB insists that it is not responsible for the incorrect weight certificate., since the security procedure is carried out by the entrance judge, who has no employment relationship with her, nor is her activity assigned by her.
This thesis is categorically rejected by the Supreme Administrative Court.
“The powers of the Agency in relation to the inscriptions and the maintenance of the respective registries are assigned by virtue of a normative act: the Regulation for the inscriptions. The provision of Art. 49 of the same explicitly establishes the responsibility of the Registry Agency the registration books and the certificates issued. special tort composition, according to which, in the presence of the general prerequisites under art. 49 in conjunction with article 45 of the CPA, the Registration Agency is responsible for damages caused by incorrect certification of the circumstances subject to registration.“, say appeals judges Diana Dzhambazova (Speaker of the House), Marinela Doncheva (rapporteur) and Rositsa Stancheva.
They point out that in this case there are all the prerequisites for tort liability.
The appellate judges recall that according to the Land Registry and Land Registry Law (CPRA) a lot is created for each property, which consists of 5 parts.
The court emphasizes that there is no dispute that the foreclosure was reflected only in the personal account of the sole proprietor, and not that of the property and the individual.
“This certification is incorrect and therefore illegal in view of the legally defined status of the natural person – trader“, writes VAPS and concludes that the spouses were deprived of the right to use the property established in their favor.
The Court of Appeals agrees with the first instance findings that the woman who acquired the property from them in 2015 is not entitled to compensation, as a new lien certificate has not been issued for this transaction.
