The reconstruction of a residential building is not an inseparable improvement of a land plot for the purposes of recognizing it as joint property of spouses

During the marriage, investments were made from the common marital property and the joint labor of the spouses, which significantly increased the value of the land plot and the residential building on it (through reconstruction). The plaintiff believes that the said real estate objects are subject to recognition as the common property of the spouses and to division between the spouses 50/50.

Position of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation:

1. When resolving the case, the courts erroneously ignored the fact that both the building and the land plot are independent objects of property rights, state registration of the right to these objects is carried out separately, as independent objects of rights; the construction of a residential building in itself is not an inseparable improvement of the land plot. Inseparable improvements to the land plot include such changes that improve its consumer properties and cannot be separated without harming this property.

2. Of legal significance in the case is the establishment of the fact that the above-mentioned works on the improvement of the site led to a significant increase in its value, whereas an insignificant investment of funds in the absence of a corresponding written agreement between the parties on the emergence of common ownership of the property does not in itself lead to the emergence of ownership rights for the person who made these investments.

3. Recognizing the residential building on the basis of Art. 37 of the RF Family Code as the joint property of the parties and dividing it between the spouses in equal shares, the courts did not take into account that the provisions of this article do not regulate the procedure for determining the shares of the parties in the division of property and do not exclude the possibility of taking into account the personal funds of the spouse invested in the creation of the joint property.

4. Having come to the conclusion that the disputed residential building was created as a result of the reconstruction of a residential building acquired by A.G. Gaidamakin (plaintiff) before entering into marriage with the plaintiff, which is an integral part of the reconstructed real estate object, when determining the spouses' shares in the right of ownership of a residential building, the court should also have taken into account the value of the defendant's personal premarital property, which was not done.

The Determination of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated 13.05.2025 No. 16-KG25-6-K4.