The Supreme Court of the Republic of Belarus considered the complaint in order of supervision viteblyanina Peter Berlinov the court's decision of Pervomaisky district of Vitebsk and Vitebsk regional court, which upheld the claim of "Zhilstroy" about his eviction in connection with the demolition of a house. The conclusion arrived at by the SC: there were no violations of substantive and procedural rights.
The Supreme Court of the country, as previously district and regional courts held that, resettling of a good citizen of your own wooden house in the city center in a two-bedroom apartment right on the ninth floor of a concrete high-rises in the neighborhood Bileva, and JSC "Zhilstroy" and executive committee acted solely under the laws and produced entirely equivalent exchange, with undisguised concern about the host.
As we wrote earlier, in connection with the proposed construction of high-rise buildings on the land passage Dimitrova 4 in Vitebsk, on which the house, garage, sauna and brick building workshop Peter Berlinov by the decision of Vitebsk city executive committee was to be transferred to another owner. But that's fate and intentions of the owner, who assumed become self-employed in the construction of the workshop is absolutely no one has been taken into account.
To agree with the disparate exchange for himself, Mr. Berlinov is not able to, so hoping to find the truth in the latter court. However, the Supreme Court did not take into account any of the above Peter Berlinov's arguments.
Mr. Berlinov argument about the need to release him apartments with a total area 367 square meters to be unfounded. Indeed, in accordance with existing legislation in a total area of residential building, which is to be demolished, do not include the area of farm buildings located on the site. Not included even when their total market value may exceed the value of the house – a paradox, but a fact.
Could not find the former owner and the evidence conclusive for the court, which would confirm his assertion of inaccurate budget estimation buildings.
The last of the arguments made by Peter Berlinov also denied by the court. The complainant has not provided any evidence that would demonstrate his inability for health reasons to live on the ninth floor of a multistory building. Although, if you think about the essence of all this perturbation, the mere fact that the relocation of a man who, on a daily basis from the comfort of your own home, not stepped into the elevator, and once on the ground, the fact that the relocation to the ninth floor can be perceived as a blatant mockery of intractable owner.
This story has demonstrated once again how difficult it is in this country to fight for their rights of ordinary citizens. In this regard, we can recall an interesting photograph, which once published the media world: during the construction of the highway in China from a high-rise apartment, just after that had to pass a new highway, did not want to move out of its holder. The proposed compensation seemed to him too small. Autobahn, however, was laid: House destroyed, but left one of the entrances where one floor living difficile Chinese. Here is a spectacle in the midst of the ruins of one of the highway entrances. And it is undemocratic China! Finally, the owner moved out, but only after failed to reach an agreement, it is arranged.
Vitebsk Spring
