LLC Chernozem, which owns on the right of permanent (perpetual) use of an agricultural land plot, has filed an administrative claim with the court regarding the change in the cadastral value of the property. In support of the claim, the company indicated a discrepancy between the information on the value of a land plot entered into the state cadastre of real estate, its market value, the use of inaccurate information about the property being appraised in determining the cadastral value of a plot, and that the dispute resolution committee cost did not take into consideration the statement of the company challenging the results of determining the cadastral value due to the absence of the applicant’s certificate of Rave ownership of the land.
To the statement of the company attached a report on the assessment of the land at the date of appeal to the court.
During the preparation of the case for the trial, it turned out that new results of the next cadastral assessment of the disputed object were included in the state real estate cadastre, in connection with which the company announced at the preliminary court session that the requirements were changed according to part 1 of art. 46 CAS on challenging the results of the next cadastral assessment. In turn, the administrative defendant offered to end the case with reconciliation.
Analyze the procedural aspects of the situation. Determine the jurisdiction and jurisdiction of the case, the procedure for going to court, the composition of the persons involved in the case, the subject of proof, distribute the burden of proof. Is it possible to reconcile the parties in cases of this category? Make a procedural decision on the situation described in the storyline.
After payment you will be available a link to the solution of this problem in the file of MS Word. It should be noted that the problem solutions put up for sale were successfully handed over in the period 2004-2019 and could be outdated. However, the general algorithm will always remain true.
No feedback yet