Launch of automatic info exchange between court ruling registry and Justice Ministry database tentatively planned for Nov 15
The automatic exchange of information between the Unified Register of Court Rulings and the Unified State Register of Legal Entities, Individual Entrepreneurs and Public Formations, as well as with the state register of property rights for real estate should be launched tentatively on November 15, Deputy Justice Minister Olena Sukmanova has said.
"We are working with the State Judicial Administration, and, by prior agreement, we were promised that they will prepare the exchange with the court registry by November 15," she said during the European Business Association's "EBA Expert Talk: Practical Aspects of Business Defence."
Sukmanova said based on the statistics of meetings of the anti-raiding commission, forgery of court decisions remains one of the most common abuses. However, the launch of automatic data exchange between the specified registries will make it technically impossible to register property in the absence of a court decision.
"That is, as soon as the registrar enters the number of court proceedings, this decision is automatically pulled from the court register, and if it is not about that, he or she will not be able to complete the registration action any further," she said.
Sukmanova said some illegal seizures of property by introducing changes in the register make up about 5% of cases considered by the anti-raiding commission.
"The most common reason is old debts, unpaid loans. The most difficult situation is when both sides declare raider seizures. When one digs deeper, there are unpaid loans or old debts, official or unofficial ones," she said.
The deputy minister said the automatic exchange with the State Land Cadastre at the technical level had neutralized unscrupulous notaries.
"Since it was launched, we have not received any complaints about double registration of land lease rights," she said.
At the same time, Business Ombudsman Algirdas Šemeta says that if one talks about preventive measures against raider attacks, then the most effective prevention would be criminal liability for such attempts.
"We propose that companies that send complaints to us, even after solving the problem, go to law enforcement agencies, but the position of law enforcers is that your problem is solved – why should there be criminal proceedings? However, the subsequent actions are important – that raider attempts should be punished. Unfortunately, this is not the case today," he said.