A client applied to us stating that he had sent a power of attorney to his wife, to whom he was married at the time, from abroad. Based on that power of attorney, she disposed of property that had been acquired by the client prior to the marriage and subsequently refused to return the money received from the sale.
The appeal filed by Paytsar Kocharyan, Chief Legal Advisor and Attorney at AM Law Firm, was fully upheld, and the court ruled to recover AMD 2,800,000 from the wife as the amount of the obligation, along with the accrued interest.
Within the framework of the claim filed before the Court of First Instance of General Jurisdiction of Yerevan, it had been taken into account that the client did not have sufficient means to pay the full state duty. Therefore, a claim was initially filed for the recovery of AMD 2,800,000.
During the proceedings, based on evidence obtained from all state authorities and banks of the Republic of Armenia, a motion was submitted to supplement the subject matter of the claim by AMD 46,065,000, requesting the court to postpone the payment of the state duty. However, the court rejected the motion, and following the examination of the case, the claim was also
dismissed. The court justified its decision by stating that the power of attorney did not contain any reservation or indication that the authorized person was obliged to return the money received from the sale of the property.
As a result of the appeal proceedings, the RA Court of Appeal, presided over by Judge Lilit Sargsyan, accepted the argument that the judgment of the Court of First Instance had violated the norms of substantive and procedural law, which had affected the outcome of the case.
The Court of Appeal not only upheld the appeal but also issued a precedent-setting decision regarding the issue of state duty privileges and the modification of the subject matter of theclaim, sending the case back to the same court for a new examination.
This decision has particular significance in judicial practice. Previously, in a number of civil cases, courts had rejected claims seeking the return of money received under a power of attorney, stating that the power of attorney did not explicitly provide for the obligation to return the funds received. The precedent set by the Court of Appeal establishes that citizens may protect their
rights regardless of such limitations in the power of attorney.
AM Law Firm continuously monitors evolving judicial practice and ensures the protection of its clients’ rights by promoting innovative and effective solutions in the legal field.
