En
+380 show number +38 095 19 19 190
Submit your application

The nuances of transactions made by persons who are not aware of their actions

“All transactions carried out by persons who, at the time of their commission, did not fully realize their actions, are subject to invalidation, but their recognition in court as such should be carried out after a full study of the proceedings!” – This conclusion was made by the Supreme Court of Ukraine on September 18, 2019 following the results of the consideration of case No. 311/3823/15-c.

Dispute history

A citizen – the son of a deceased mother, who donated housing to another son, applied to the court with the requirement to recognize the invalidity of the power of attorney and the donation agreement implemented on its basis.

The motivation for the claim was that the plaintiff at the time of her mother’s death was registered with her at the same address, so he actually accepted the inheritance that opened after her death.

After a while, he learned that his mother, a month before her death, had issued a power of attorney for her brother, with which she authorized him to donate a house to the plaintiff’s brother. He also learned that he was judicially recognized as such that he lost the right to use the controversial dwelling.

He did not agree with this and stated in court that the mother issued a power of attorney a month before her death at a time when she did not realize the significance of her actions and could not control them, since she was using tramadol.

He pointed out that this medicine has a serious effect on the human psyche, his mother had cancer and she had been ill for a long time, 2 months before she died, she did not get up, she felt severe pain.

“All these factors indicate that at the moment of drawing up the power of attorney, she could not objectively perceive the reality of what was happening! In this regard, the plaintiff asked the court to annul the power of attorney and the donation agreement, as well as to cancel the registration of the brother’s ownership of the house donated to him!”

The court of first instance satisfied the claim, the court of appeal agreed with this decision, and the cassation, represented by the Supreme Court of Ukraine, canceled these decisions and sent the case for review to the court of first instance for the reason that the courts, making decisions, did not examine all the circumstances of the dispute.

SCU position

It was established that, indeed, the deceased, during her lifetime, issued a power of attorney for her brother, by which she authorized him to donate housing to one of her sons. She did this while being a patient, taking tramadol, which was recorded by the corresponding expert conclusion. The house was donated.

At first glance, the claim of the deprived son to recognize the power of attorney and donation as illegal was quite justified, as well as the decision of the court of first instance – this is a satisfying requirement, but …

The court of first instance did not attach any importance to the fact that the inability of the deceased at the moment of issuing the power of attorney to realize her actions was not unconditional.

Despite the fact that she was taking potent medications, she did not make the decision herself, but with her husband, who was not sick and gave his consent to donating their joint housing in writing and notarized.

P.S. The deprived of inheritance son needed to first consult with a lawyer, which would have saved him a lot of time and money!

29.11.2019

267

YOU MAY BE INTERESTED IN
SCU: PASSING THE MEDICAL COMMISSION AT WORKING HOURS – NOT ABSENTEEISM!

The Supreme Court of Ukraine considered case No. 699/640/18 (production No. 61-17310sv19) and on 04.12.2019 formed a legal conclusion, which “put in place” the employer who dismissed the employee under the “absenteeism” article. He counted as a truancy the day when she underwent a medical examination. DETAILS OF THE PROCEEDINGS The military unit’s employee filed […]

The expert conclusion about the “probability of forgery” is not an argument

The Supreme Court of Ukraine got the case № 760/10691/18, during which the validity of the sale and purchase agreement was challenged, which, according to the plaintiff, was not signed by him! As a result of the proceedings, a legal opinion was published on 04.09.19! The Ukrainian Supreme Court determined that the expert’s conclusion that […]

“Lustrated” civil servants contested dismissal in the ECHR

Any protection of interests in court is a procedure limited by the terms prescribed by law! How long any dispute can be considered in court depends on the specific circumstances of each individual situation. Ukrainian legislation “allows” litigation to last for years, and the European Court from time to time tries to suppress this pattern, […]

Appealing the decision of the Military Medical Commission (MMC)

The Military Medical Commission (MMC) is a body that conducts a medical examination of persons performing military duty and determines their suitability for military service. Sometimes such persons do not agree with the conclusions of the MMC, considering them unfounded. In such cases, there is a need to appeal the decision of the MMC. According […]

The Supreme Court to the Prosecutor’s Office is a friend and comrade! Don’t believe? Read on!

The case № 638/8636/17-c considered by the Supreme Court, 05/13/2020, was closed by a legal conclusion, according to which the inactivity of the prosecutor’s office is not evidence of moral harm, therefore, it cannot be compensated! Initially, the lawsuit was initiated by a citizen who believes that the inaction of the law enforcement system is […]

Supreme Court of Ukraine on an additional period for accepting an inheritance

According to the rule established by law, the inheritance is accepted within 6 months, counted from the moment of opening the inheritance. The law allows for the possibility of extending this period if the heir, for some good reason, did not have time to enter into inheritance rights. The disputed points of “validity” of reasons […]