Professor of Real Estate Law tells Iltalehti that the birch real estate dispute is a very open case.
According to Martti Häkkänen, a professor of real estate law, decisions of lawsuit are extremely rare. Aop
Ex-hockey player Mikko Koivu and his former wife Helena birch The ownership of the property in Turku’s double time is once again a topic when the police retrieved Helena off the site on Wednesday.
On Thursday, Helena posted videos in her Instagram stories, including trying to convince the police that she still owned half of the apartment. However, in the videos, the police justified the removal of Helena from the property by the fact that according to the information they received, the apartment is not owned by Helena.
The District Court of Southwest Finland confirmed to Iltalehti on Thursday that the birch country dispute is still ongoing. In March, Iltalehti reported that Helena complained about the Land Survey of Finland’s lawsuit decision that Mikko would completely own real estate in Turku. The appeal was submitted on 12 March.
Land court judge Jusse Määttä tells Iltalehti that the lawsuit decision is not final. In practice, this means that the appeal period is pending and that a change in the lawsuit is possible.
The expert comment
Iltalehti reached the Professor of Real Estate Law Martti Häkkänen. He does not comment on the case as such, but speaks at a general level. According to Häkkänen, from the point of view of legislation, the legal entry alone does not determine the ownership of the property if they both owned the property, for example, on the basis of a deed of sale.
-Even if the Land Court is changing the legal entry as a result of the complaint, the proper ownership of the property is, in principle, still determined by the fact that the parties have purchased the property and how, for example, the consequences of any divorce affect ownership, Häkkänen opens.
Helena Koivu has lived in Finland since she moved to a guest house in the Turku Kakserra property. Zumawire / mvphotos
According to Häkkänen, the lawnial entry is, in principle, only public information entered in the register of how the property ownership is actually determined. The lawsuit does not formally prevent the property of the property to be reinforced, for example, if it has grounds for divorce.
– The actual ownership of ownership can be conducted in a different trial, which would not be a lawsuit at all. If the person were to be confirmed at that stage, then there would be a conflict between the decision of the lawsuit and the true ownership, says Häkkänen.
– In this case, the person would have the right to apply for a change of content from the National Land Survey of Finland with a new legal application, where he or she would be marked as a half -owner, the professor continues.
According to the Land Survey of the Land Survey of Finland, Mikko Koivu would fully own the properties in Turku’s double. Helena Koivu has complained about it. Pasi Liesimaa
So what, then, can you be on the property or control it? According to Häkkänen, in the event of police cases, lawsuit information may be used as evidence for the property ownership, although there may be something else in principle.
– That is, in practice, the ownership of lawying information is very central to the management issues, as well as evidence, even though it does not finally resolve that ownership.
Häkkänen says that the land owner of the property can apply for an eviction sentence for the district court.
– The District Court may issue a judgment where the defendant no longer has the legal basis to be on the property and would be obliged to take all his goods out of there. At the same time, such a judgment has to take a stand on the real owner of the property.
According to the lawsuit reviewed by Iltalehti on April 4, Mikko Koivu owns the two -time property alone. The property has been made on August 7, 2023, but it is not final. In the demographic information system, Mikko and Helena Koivu are still marked as the owners of the property.