Officials are suing shareholders for an unfinished facility in the center of Voronezh

The Voronezh Arbitration Court is considering counterclaims from Voronezh House-Building Company LLC (VDSK) and the region's Department of Property and Land Relations (DIZO), which are challenging the ownership of unfinished properties and land plots under them in the center of Voronezh. The conflict flared up due to the fact that VDSK was unable to complete the construction of an extension for the art school on time. Now the company accuses the authorities of “unjust enrichment” of 24.6 million rubles, and the department demands compensation for the market value of the land provided - more than 70 million rubles. Shareholders are also involved in the conflict: they may lose the funds invested in the first floor of the extension, which was promised to them for “utility premises.”

At the beginning of March, the consideration of the claim of VDSK LLC against the Voronezh Art School (VHU) and DIZO for the recovery of 24.6 million rubles was postponed. According to VDSK, the department did not have the right to register ownership of the school premises unfinished by the company. It began to be built as part of the joint investment project of VCU, VDSK and the regional branch of United Russia “Voronezh - the city of craftsmen”. The project involved the construction of a residential building and an extension for the VHU on the street. Bolshaya Streletskaya on a site that was in perpetual use by the school. The house was put into operation in the fall of 2008, but the extension remained unfinished due to the crisis. Let us note that previously the proceedings in the case were suspended three times already - “before the expiration of the period established for conducting expert research.”

The DIZO is confident that the construction of a residential building near the art school was carried out by the VDSK without the consent of the owner of the site - the department itself. The company made a profit from the sale of apartments, but the region was at a loss because it lost the land, which is now the common shared property of the residents. Therefore, DIZO demands more than 70 million rubles from VDSK. (yesterday the arbitration court held a regular meeting on the relevant claim). RUB 28.7 million from this amount - compensation for the market value of the site on which the apartment building was built.

Another 41.4 million rubles. The department assessed its damage from construction on a site located next to the water treatment plant with an area of 5.890 thousand square meters. m of administrative buildings. In 2010, VDSK itself provided its DIZO, when it became clear that the company could not complete the construction of the facility for water and chemical treatment without additional investments. VDSK was expected to complete the work using the profits from the sale of offices. But now the lease agreement for the plot in the DIZO is called void, since bidding for the right to conclude a lease agreement was not held. The department does not deny that during the period of use of the land, VDSK was able to register ownership of three real estate properties, 40, 20 and 17% complete. But officials are demanding compensation from the company for damages for the site, which is occupied by unfinished construction.

In addition, a third interested party appeared in the dispute—the shareholders. As part of the investment project, they entered into shared construction agreements for both apartments and the first floor in the extension to the art school. It should have been allocated for utility premises (parking). However, the authorities registered it as property along with the entire extension with a total area of 4.55 thousand square meters. m. As a result, DIZO employees also meet in courts with shareholders who have missed out on part of the property promised to them under contracts. At the same time, at first the Leninsky District Court satisfied the demands of two shareholders to recognize the ownership of part of the first floor in the extension. And then he refused two more co-investors with similar claims: in one decision it was stated that the object was not completed and ownership of it could not be recognized, and in the other, the agreements of the shareholders were generally recognized as unconcluded and at the same time invalid. In total, today there are ten cases from shareholders in the Leninsky District Court, about 25 owners participated in the processes. So far, seven decisions have been made: two positive for shareholders, one neutral and four negative.

A source at VDSK told Kommersant yesterday that the company is ready to drop its claim against DIZO if it returns the first floor to citizens. However, VDSK will not stop defending itself against the department’s claims regarding unfinished administrative buildings. It was not possible to communicate with the director of the art school, Sergei Gulevsky - he is on sick leave until April 1. Both cell phones of the deputy head of the legal department of the DIZO Alexander Zrazhevsky, who represents the department in court, did not answer yesterday.

Let us recall that according to the project, VDSK committed to invest money in the construction of a residential building on the previously allocated territory near the school and at the same time to build an extension to it to accommodate an exhibition hall, a museum and 26 special workshops. The need for the project was explained by the fact that the school building is in disrepair, and its students (more than 200) are “elementarily cramped.” The head of VDSK, Valery Belesikov, then noted that “none of the city’s construction organizations agreed to build on such conditions.”

General Director of Prasolov, Gafarov and Partners Legal Agency Dmitry Prasolov, who represents the interests of shareholders, explains that if the case is lost in the regional court, DIZO can take away the entire first floor of the extension (although it is designed as a parking lot with small high windows). But in the end, using the same scheme, the right of 90 families to apartments in an already rented house can be challenged. “It is clear that, most likely, the department does not need this, but legally, if their practice is supported by the regional court, this becomes possible. Then the entire project of an extension to the VCU will become one insignificant transaction,” explains the lawyer.

Andrey Tsvetkov, Maria Starikova

DIZO is not afraid of masters