An apartment by inheritance

At the end of January 2009, the citizen "C" was given power of attorney to a citizen "K", certified by the notary of Moscow, with all the necessary powers for the alienation of an Apartment.

At the end of February 2009 was the Contract of sale and purchase of apartments and decorated Transfer act to the Contract of sale of an apartment. All the documents were signed by the citizen "K" on behalf of the citizen "C".

In mid-January 2012 citizen "C" has died.

Suit of our client, as the heir of the citizen "C", was stated in the order of Art. 177 Civil Code. In accordance with this Article, the transaction may be declared ineffective by the court if it is made by a capable citizen, who was at the time of the transaction in such a condition that he was not able to understand the significance of his actions or to control them.

The definition of the Tushinsky district court of Moscow was to satisfy the petition of the plaintiff about the assignment of post-mortem forensic psychological and psychiatric examination on the case.

According to the examination citizen "C" could not understand the meaning of her actions and to control them when signing a power of attorney and a contract of sale of the apartment. The trial court agreed with the conclusions of the examination.

The Defendants in this case amounted to the fact that the limitation period was missed by the heir.

The trial court refused to satisfy the suit of our client in connection with the omission of the heir to a one-year limitation period. The court of first instance considered that the heir, as the legal successor of the deceased citizen "C" had to apply to the court with the application on challenging transactions within 1 year from the moment of its making.

In the appeal, the employees of YurBureau LLC formulated the arguments that the plaintiff had the right to challenge the transaction only after the death of the citizen "C", and until the death of the citizen "C" the plaintiff had no reason to challenge the transaction. Thus, the limitation period was missed.

The appellate court agreed with the given arguments. As a result, the transaction of purchase and sale agreement was recognized ineffective, and our company achieved its our client's objectives.

The appellate court agreed with our arguments. As a result, the purchase and sale of the apartment has been invalidated, and our company was able to achieve the objectives set by our client.