Before the audacity of entrepreneurs, Lithuania was powerless: instead of a modest kiosk, it was an illegal shopping complex

Popular market: arbitrarily built on state land

What happens when a more arrogant citizen decides to expand the limits of his patrimony and occupies part of the state’s land that does not belong to him with a fence? There are many examples of such behavior and its consequences. When authorities receive a signal of illegal activity, the fences will be demolished sooner or later.

However, when confiscation of state land is associated with strong income-generating activities, the situation becomes more complicated. Entrepreneurs who don’t want to lose funds and invested profits can afford to hire qualified attorneys, a long judicial marathon begins. Finally, an “Orwellian” situation arises, in which a citizen who moved a fence a few meters and increased the plot at the expense of state land is publicly demolished, and a business that has committed far more serious violations finds ways to continue working.

A similar situation has arisen in Kaunas, where a large shopping complex has been kept on state land on the Marijampolė road for several years: the “Pas Rasą” meat shop with a pizzeria. Although the city council showed determination and demolished the illegal kiosks some time ago, this market is still in operation. In late 2018, the court ordered Dargita to demolish these buildings on her own, but the court’s decision has yet to be implemented. It is true that demolition is not indicated for the entire market, but only for the most part. This happened due to legal nuances, since formally it is not a single building, but several buildings.

The beginning of the story, in 2013

The State Inspectorate for Territorial Planning and Construction received a notification in 2013 that a market and a parking lot had illegally exploded in Kaunas, on the Marijampolė road, on state-owned land. Documents available to Delfi testify that construction started here in 2009-2010.

“During the examination of the complaint, it was established that UAB Dargita constructed a non-special building on state land without construction permits and the consent of the state land administrator: a commercial pavilion with a length of 17.50 m, width – 18.56 m, height – 3.67 m, area, total area – 324.8 sq. m. Construction Inspection representatives commented.

They mentioned that an arbitrary construction act was drafted in the same year and a requirement to eliminate the consequences of arbitrary construction, requiring the builder to demolish the pavilion on undeveloped state land and fix the construction site no later than March from 2014.

“The term for the execution of the mandatory order, which was extended several times, expired on June 1, 2015. After the inspection on 9/9/2015, it was established that the obligation to demolish the flag has not been met” , comments the Inspection.

The Construction Inspectorate has filed an application with the court, long and complicated legal proceedings have been initiated, which we will not detail in this publication, we will only mention the essential details. It should be noted that in April 2019, the Kaunas Regional Court upheld the decision of the Kaunas District Court, which requires UAB Dargita to demolish (dismantle) the disputed buildings and tidy up the construction site at its own cost within 3 months from the day the court decision became effective.

Director’s question: who ordered the item?

Let’s go back to the origins of this story. Who is the company that is not yet enforcing the court ruling and the market it has built is still operational?

Dargita was established 16 years ago. According to data from the Records Center, he was initially headed by Rimantė Maleckienė, after a time he was replaced by Arvydas Maleckas.

Over the years, the administration of this company has changed several times, until in 2016 Gita Khizar took over the administration of Dargitai.

The documents available to Delfi attest that this woman was appointed to the position of director by two shareholders who manage the company: Rimantė and Arvydas Maleckai. It is true that the minutes of the general shareholders’ meeting mention another name of R. Khizar – Maleckaitė. She is also said to live at the same address as Malecki’s property company, Dargita.

A huge complex of buildings with the company’s registered office is located next to an illegal market, across the narrow street. From the point of view of the country, it produces meat products. This is suggested by specific smells, tall chimneys on buildings.

After contacting G. Khizar, the current director of Dargita, on a publicly available phone number, she said that the company was not currently operating. When asked about the construction carried out by this company, which was declared illegal by the court, and the current situation, the businessman first asked: “where did this information come from and who ordered the article”?

After explaining that the publication was not really ordered by anyone, and that all the information was obtained from court documents available to the public, he again asked who the alleged client was, who was most interested in making this story public. Recalling that it is in the public interest to know the circumstances and how arbitrary buildings appear on state-owned land, the director of Dargita disagreed.

“It just came to our attention then. I cannot provide any information as I am not involved in that process. I am on maternity leave as many public documents as there are. If you are very interested, you can read, it would be enough,” said Mr. Khizar. .

When asked who his company’s shareholders are, Knizar said he couldn’t say that because he didn’t know. We remind you that G. Khizar, who had the surname of Maleckaitė, was appointed to this position at the General Meeting of Shareholders of the Company on July 26, 2016 by Rimantė and Arvydas Maleckai.

The business continues, but another company is already doing it.

It appears that Dargita, facing serious legal problems due to arbitrary construction, is not really operating at the moment.

However, the market, most of which the court ordered to demolish, is still in charge of this company. It continues to market meat products.

But formally, it’s not Dargita that operates here, but another private limited company with a surprisingly similar name: Dargita tau.

The data collected by Delfi suggests that it may be a kind of “undercover” organization created to continue a profitable business.

Dargita tau was founded on May 11, 2017, and its founder and first director was Raimundas Budnikas. Publicly available data shows that this person has registered many companies, probably involved in his establishment.

Lukas Gudeliūnas will soon become the sole owner and director of this company, the address of the company’s registered office will be changed, and he will register at one of the houses on Striaunės Street, where the director’s place of residence is indicated.

Looking at the documents submitted to the Records Center, the extremely young age of the sole shareholder and director of the company is surprising. He is now 23 years old and has just turned 20 as an entrepreneur.

Despite his young age, the business he runs seems to be thriving. According to Sodra, Dargita tau currently employs up to 39 people, and her sales revenue in 2018 ranged from LTL 1 million to LTL 2 million. euros

Could it be that this young Kaunas resident is just a builder of Dargita’s owners, who are in legal trouble, and the company he manages was established to complicate legal proceedings and not stop the business? This question could not be answered.

When trying to contact the director of Dargitos tau, he was notified that his incoming calls were blocked by calling his publicly available phone number. After calling another mobile phone number, which was mentioned in the wanted employees announcement, the woman who answered promised to pass on to the head of the company that a Delfi journalist would like to contact him. However, his call was not received.

Isn’t the public interest violated because the territory is beautifully landscaped?

After the trial Dargita took new steps. She petitioned the court for a stay of execution until November 2020.

The request stated that administrative proceedings had been initiated to legalize the flag, which the court had ordered demolished.

“Procedures initiated due to circumstances beyond UAB Dargita’s control have not been completed, the parcel project has not been completed, and the land lease agreement has not been signed. UAB Dargita is interested in preserving illegal buildings, therefore, it seeks not to delay time, but to take advantage of the opportunity offered by the court to legalize these buildings, “we wrote in the employers’ request.

At this stage of the litigation, Dargita tau, a company that operates in leased buildings that is not formally related to its owner, Dargita, also operates on the basis of illegal construction.

He supported Dargita’s request to postpone the execution of the decision to demolish the buildings and present some very interesting arguments that show how the company perceives the public interest.

Dargita tau told the court that he owned the Pas Rasą brand, which had leased the building to UAB Dargita and mentioned that the company had 39 employees and had paid taxes.

“After the execution of the judicial decision and the demolition of the building, the business would collapse and the employees would be dismissed. From the documents presented in the case, it appears that after the adoption of the judicial decision, UAB Dargita took active measures to legalize the disputed buildings.

The buildings in the dispute do not infringe the public interest, on the contrary, it is a beautifully landscaped and well-maintained area on the outskirts of the city, a paved parking lot, “argued Dargita tau reluctant to enforce the sentence.

However, these arguments did not convince the judges on April 16, 2020. The Kaunas Regional Court rejected the companies’ complaints and confirmed the previous ruling of the Kaunas District Court, which refused to postpone the execution of the decision. judicial: the demolition of illegal buildings.

The verdict of the Construction Inspection: legalizing arbitrary construction is not realistic

It is clear that entrepreneurs are using all possible means to legalize illegal buildings that are built on state-owned land. Sometimes it works, is this scenario possible in this case too?

When asked by the representatives of the Construction Inspection, who started the legal proceedings, their response was categorical.

“Paragraph 12 of Article 14 of the State Supervisory Law of Territorial Planning and Construction of the Republic of Lithuania imperatively regulates that the legalization of new structures arbitrarily built and constructed on state lands is prohibited if the construction works were carried out without administration of land or use rights.

It should be noted that the Construction Inspection has no data that UAB Dargita receives state land located in Marijampolės pl. 18, Kaunas, management and use rights. In such a situation and after the entry into force of the provisions of paragraph 12 of article 14 of the Supervision Law, it is considered that the legalization of a flag arbitrarily constructed on state lands is prohibited, ”said the representatives of the Inspection.
Although attempts are being made to suspend the execution of the court decision and demolish the illegally erected Dargita buildings using the interests of Dargita tau, which took over its activities and appears to be offline, the Construction Inspectorate made this clear in a sent comment. Delphi’s portal.

“It should be noted that UAB Dargita tau, upon concluding a lease with UAB Dargita on 05/19/2017, acted at your own risk and must bear all legal consequences, as a legal entity, you must be diligent, active and ask that Se has opened a civil case on the elimination of the consequences of the arbitrary construction of the pavilion, “said the representatives of the Inspection.

In the history of construction: the enigmatic role of Kaunas officials

This story is also interesting because, apparently, the buildings of businessmen on state lands were not erected without the knowledge of the municipality of Kaunas. There was a time when Dargitai even managed to register ownership of these buildings.

The registration was made on the basis of a document issued by the Municipality of Kaunas in 2009: written approval for a simplified project for the expansion of a shopping kiosk and the installation of a site.

This document, or more precisely the copy presented to the court, raised serious suspicions about whether it was falsified. One particularly significant detail stands out: at that time, the municipality of Kaunas used a stamp that said “Urban Planning Division”, and the press on the UAB’s Dargita project indicated “Urban Planning Division”.

“This circumstance was considered by the court as a well-founded presumption regarding the falsification of the written consent. In the absence of the original document, it is not possible to carry out the examination of the signature and seal of said employee,” is written in the ruling. of the Kaunas Regional Court which entered into force.

The suspicion that an important document has been falsified is reinforced by the significant circumstance mentioned in the Kaunas municipality’s response: the municipality stated that it had no data that the document had been issued. More precisely: the fact of the issue is not recorded, the official whose signature is on the document denies having signed it. Furthermore, this written consent could not be issued without the consent of the National Land Service.

The original of this document is missing, only a copy. There is also more confusion, which only reinforces the suspicion that an important document may have been forged. Or perhaps Kaunas officials extradited him, but did not record that fact anywhere?

“The court considered the non-preservation of the original document to raise reasonable doubts as to whether a written consent had been issued. The court further based this conclusion on the fact that the defendant (Dargita – ed.) Had no legal basis for using the land, which was an obstacle to the issuance of a building permit. In addition, in June 18, 2009 An employee of the municipality of the city of Kaunas had written on the drawing of the project “Simplified Kiosk Kiosk 2009-06 Kiosk” of the UAB Dargita that this is a temporary building, which should be postponed until 2012. on June 18, 2009. July 20 there was no legal basis to approve the increase of the same building, but no longer as temporary, but as permanent, “declared the Kaunas Regional Court, which satisfied the claim of the Construction Inspection.

When the Municipality of Kaunas asked to explain whether the document was issued to Dargita or if it was falsified by someone, Rūta Šimkaitytė – Kudarauskė, the head of the Legal and Consulting Division, received the following comment: It is unquestionable and binding on everyone without exception.

As this is a story of more than a decade, the events of 2009 could be explained in detail by the people who headed the municipality and its administration at the time. ”

When will the bulldozers be moved? The sheriff awaits the decision of the Construction Inspection

Despite the final and unappealable decision to demolish the arbitrary buildings, the meat shop “Pas Rasą” continues to operate.

When Delfi contacted Sheriff Marek Petrovskis working in Kaunas, who was given the execution order, he admitted that there were situations in which a temporary building, a lookout or a fence would not have been erected on state land, but rather a store, which has not been in practice.

“According to the court decision, there is an obligation to demolish the illegal buildings by Dargita, and if it does not comply with this obligation, a fine of 30 euros is awarded for each day of delay. Once we have written a decision not to To implement the law, we ask the court to impose a fine on the director of the company. This request was rejected by the Kaunas District Court because the fine is imposed on a legal person. However, the legal entity itself does not comply with the court decision: there is no property, there is no money in the account, ”sheriff M. Petrovskis told Delfi’s website.

The court decision also establishes that if the Dargita company does not demolish the buildings erected arbitrarily, the Construction Inspection can do so.

“Now the Construction Inspectorate has to decide how to protect the public interest: it will either hire contractors and demolish buildings, or it will take the position that Dargita has to be demolished,” said Sheriff M. Petrovskis.

The sheriff said he had repeatedly received a request from an attorney representing businessmen to suspend the execution process. It is motivated by the fact that other cases are currently being considered in court, one is seeking permission to legalize buildings declared illegal, the other is permission to manage and use a state parcel to pay rent.

“Now a fine is calculated for non-compliance with the judicial decision, we are awaiting the decision of the Construction Inspection.” Until now, she has not expressed her desire to do so. It is possible to understand that the demolition work requires the hiring of a contractor, the payment of money, which is later recovered from Dargita. However, this company does not operate, “Dargita tau” works there, which seems unrelated, “said Sheriff M. Petrovskis.

He mentioned that a business lawyer had asked the court to apply the principle of proportionality, that it would be fairer to legalize illegal court buildings than to demolish them.

Commercial representative: “We did everything in accordance with the law”

To achieve objectivity, Delfi contacted Saulius Petronis, an attorney representing the Dargita company, an assistant attorney for the Smolex law firm.

He presented the position of his clients, the company Dargita, whose essence is that the construction of the market was carried out in accordance with the law, with the approval of the municipality. The same, that the municipality of Kaunas later resigned and denied when issuing it.

“In 2009, permits were issued for the construction and use of three kiosks instead of one. The land was abandoned, covered in bushes and not included in the parcel records to be returned due to the road protection zone.

In other words, UAB Dargita ordered a Kaunas landfill on abandoned state lands, and not only trade but also production takes place on this plot. The state benefits from the taxes paid, as UAB Dargita tau employs around 40 people. This company complies with all European veterinary requirements, it was allowed to work in quarantine, the employees were not fired, all jobs were saved, ”S. Petronis, the assistant attorney representing Dargita, presented her position.

And how do the company’s representatives evaluate the situation when, when the municipality issues a written approval for the extension of the kiosk and the parking installation project, then it is declared that said document was not issued, inconsistencies in the content are emphasized of the seal, and the person who signs it denies it?

“In our opinion, all approvals were issued and the buildings constructed on the basis of these were registered in accordance with the procedure established by law. Why the opposite was said later, we cannot say. The municipality contradicts itself. First it issues permits and then says it didn’t issue them.

From 2012 to 2017, it is written that we allow to use and then request a permit extension. A land tax was paid. When the courts started, nobody wanted to talk to us, because it still seems that we are some kind of criminals ”, the representative of Dargita was transmitted by his representative S. Petronis.

When asked how the buildings leased by the company were currently declared illegal by a court decision and their demolition was demanded, the answer was that this was determined by the peculiarities of our country’s legal system.

“This happened because the jurisprudence of the Lithuanian courts is consistent: when a construction permit is declared invalid by a court, not only the rented buildings but also the buildings themselves are recognized as illegal constructions (eg Sabonis boots on the Curonian Spit, judgment of the ECHR of January 9, 2018 in Tumeliai v. Lithuania (Petition No. 25545/14)) ”, the answer is positive.

Dargita version: how it was from the beginning

When Delfi’s portal asks how illegal construction on state lands began and proceeded, S. Petronis, Assistant Attorney, presents the following sequence of events:

1) 2009 April 14 UAB Dargita requested permission from the Kaunas City Municipality Administration (KMSA) to design and construct a temporary commercial building / kiosk of up to 15 square meters. m near Samylų street. 17. (then address of this place – ed.)

2) 2011 m. October 6 UAB Dargita petitioned KMSA for a request to install parking spaces on state land in Marijampolės pl. in the road protection zone between Pabradė and Samylų streets.

3) 2011 October 19 in writing no. 43-2-1251 KMSA reported that it did not object to UAB Dargita, after receiving written approval from the NJT, design temporary parking lots.

4) 2012 March 28 UAB Dargita asked KMSA for an initial request to approve the construction project “Extension of the existing commercial pavilion 2012-03” on Samylų street – Marijampolės pl. intersections

5) 2012 In April 2012, UAB Dargita prepared the project “Connection and expansion of existing commercial pavilions 2012-04” in Kaunas, Samylų str. pavilions and an extension of 47.37 square meters. m area up to 79.39 sq. m. m, in which the title page and the first floor and ceiling drawing are in 2012. April 18 RP Strimaitis, Deputy Head of the Urban Planning Department of KMSA, approved the “Temporary Building Reconstruction (Reconstruction Solutions) “, and the drawing of the extension of the Existing Commercial Pavilions shows the drawing of 2011. December 2 Stamp of JA Bublis, Chief Specialist of the Urban Management Division of KMSA, signed without resolution, April 18, LP Resolution, Chief Specialist of the KMSA Urban Planning Division, that the merger and expansion of existing temporary commercial pavilions without the installation of parking spaces and pavement was revised, RPS, Deputy Chief of the KMSA Urban Planning Division, in 2012. April 28 approve the solutions for the temporary reconstruction of the building, use the building until the time specified in the contract and in 2012. June 21 resolution 2017 28 April to move the building or request an extension of use.

6) 2012 May 3 UAB Dargita asked KMSA for an initial request to approve the construction project “Installation of a parking lot on the Marijampolė road between Pabradė and Samylų streets”.

7) 2012 May 29 UAB Dargita asked KMSA for a request for temporary parking near Marijampolės pl. between Pabradės and Samylų st., which KMSA decided to approve, indicating that the site can be taken to meet the needs of the public during the reconstruction of the Marijampolė road.

8) 2014 November 17 UAB Dargita asked KMSA for an initial request to issue special architectural requirements for a commercial building with specialized food trade on Samylų str. / Southern hinge, Kaunas, for construction project.

9) 2015 March 26 UAB Dargita asked KMSA to adjust the cadastral measurements; requested permission to perform Marijampolės pl. cadastral measurements, specifying the street boundary on Samylų str. (near Rodūnios Street) in Kaunas.

10) 2016 November 7 UAB Dargita wrote a Statement of Disputes and on its basis in 2016. November 22 VĮ Registrų centras ”registered UAB Dargita’s property rights to the disputed buildings located in Kaunas, Marijampolės pl. 18)

11) 2019 April 8 UAB Dargita and Rimantė Maleckienė submitted a request to KMS to conclude the communication communications and other structures administered by the Municipality of the city of Kaunas: 1) parking lots – concrete pavement (30.5 m long, 9.0 m long wide, 274.5 sq. m area and 36.0 m long, 17.2 m wide, 619.2 sq. m area, total area – 893.7 sq. m), located in Kaunas, Samylų str. (near Samylų 17 Street, Kaunas); 2) stone pavement pavement (33.0 m long, 1.1 m wide, 36.3 sq. M area), concrete pavement pavement (6.35 m long, 7.0 m wide, 44.45 sq. M area), located in Kaunas, Samylų str. (near Samylų str. 17, Kaunas), land lease.

12) 2019 June 7 At the request of UAB Dargita and Rimantė Maleckienė, the company asked KMSA and asked to join the technical work project “Parking (p. 12), Marijampolės pl. 18, Kaunas, a simplified construction project ”.