St. Petersburg artists sue Sergei Bugaev (Afrika)

[Магнолия]

Сообщение от Irina ; 2702951 "

And so throughout the supply chain to the document , in which the author in the past has transferred its exclusive rights to the product of a subsequent holder .

Experience shows that any link in the chain falls , disappears and then preobretatel conscientious . Denied the plaintiff in the lawsuit and verbally without protocol offering to buy the item at preobretatelya .

[Pavel]

Сообщение от Alec Sander, 2703091

Not everything is measured auction records.

What can be more specific and what is measured.
So were the prices it is necessary that someone bought and sold someone.
Who and where?
Otherwise, it's all bullshit to promotion and then ay-yay yay not as good.

[Магнолия]

Сообщение от Irina ; 2703041 "

, however, subscribe to the plaintiffs and declare that none of his work in the property Sergei Bugaev I did not give , sell or away . "" ""

I have already explained that the property - the concept of a composite . For example, a contract for the possession of a thing may be that the author will never recover the picture.

[artcol]

Сообщение от Irina

In this case , I think the opposing counsel will request the documents of purchase and sale entered into between you and the gallery, and documents from the gallery, confirming its competence to carry out the sale.

Yeah , wow, that's where the punitive psychiatry something.
I - a priori bona fide purchaser , to prove anything should not, but just the opposite . You see the logic ?

Сообщение от Irina

its exclusive rights to the product

And here the exclusive rights ? Have you any idea what you are talking about ?

Сообщение от Irina

And if the parties have given false testimony , then pull and fraud .

Against themselves and their loved ones I have the right not to testify , as well as to disavow his testimony.

[Кирилл Сызранский]

Сообщение от artcol; 2703271 "

against himself and his family I have the right not to testify , as well as to disavow his testimony .

Actually, it is not about criminal law and on civil and in a civil court the burden of proof lies with the parties - on the healing and the defendant .
Read the Code of Civil Procedure ( CCP RF ) , Article 56 , " The burden of proof ":

1. Each party must prove the circumstances relied on as grounds for their claims and objections , unless otherwise provided by federal law.

2 . The court determines which facts relevant to the case , which side should they prove circumstances makes up for discussion , even if the parties to any of them cited .

[artcol]

Сообщение от Cyril Syzransky

In a civil court must , otherwise the judge finds in favor of the opposing party .

To this must be a good reason .
Here, for example ,
You say, I did not give Bugaev and Bugaev says - gave . And that , the judge regards the decision in your favor ? No, it will first establish whether the claim is competent , ie listen to your arguments. But after that, will talk to the defendant.

Сообщение от Cyril Syzransky

rests with the parties - on the healing and the defendant .

on healing first.

the circumstances to which it refers as grounds for its claims and objections

Look, Bugaev - priori bona fide purchaser .
Certain disputes his right side .
Directs the lawsuit , citing its arguments .
The judge these arguments takes into account the (already at the meeting) or rejects the claim.
If he accepts the claim , the Bugaev says that these pictures were legally acquired them through a third unidentified person .
What's next ?

[Fed]

Cyril Syzransky, and if the court finds that the work should remain with the current owners.
You acknowledge that artists and swindlers, or what will be your conclusion then?

[artcol]

Сообщение от Cyril Syzransky

Some " blah-blah-ba, I have experience, but I pleaded, I, Sutyajnik All courts to be afraid ".
<! - ~ 7 ~ ->

No, Syzrasnky, it's just you - theorist <! - ~ 5 ~ ->

[Кирилл Сызранский]

Сообщение от Fed

Cyril Syzransky, and if the court finds that the work should remain with the current owners. You acknowledge that artists and swindlers, or what will be your conclusion then?

And to you, then what kind of grief? <! - ~ 1 ~ ->
Thief thief named on TV? Well and good: If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck. (c) <! - ~ 7 ~ ->

And anyway, there is not a lot of attention Cyril Syzran? Not a lot of questions to him?
 <! - ~ 7 ~ ->
_________________
artcol, enlightens:

Читать дальше... 

Article 57. Presentation of evidence and vindication
 
1. The evidence submitted by the parties and other persons participating in the case. The court has the right to invite them to submit additional evidence. If the submission of necessary evidence for these individuals is difficult, the court upon request of assisting in the collection and the taking of evidence.

2. The petition for the recovery of proof should be designated evidence, and indicate what the circumstances are significant for the consideration and resolution of the case can be confirmed or denied by this proof, are impediments to obtaining evidence and the location of the evidence. The court issues a query to get the side of evidence or the evidence itself. A person who is claimed by the court proof, send it to the court or lease your hands on a person with an appropriate request to be submitted to the court.

3. Officials or citizens who are not able to provide any proof of the claimed or established by the court, must notify the court within five days of receipt of the request stating the reasons. In the case of unnotified court, and if they fail to court to submit the evidence for reasons deemed unacceptable by the court, on the guilty officials or citizens who are not parties involved in the case, a penalty - on officials in the amount of up to one thousand rubles for citizens - to five hundred rubles.

4. Imposition of a penalty does not relieve the relevant officials and citizens who have claimed evidence from the obligation to present it to the court.

Article 59. The relevance of evidence
 
The court will only accept the evidence relevant to the consideration and resolution of the case.

 
 Article 60. Admissibility of evidence
 
Circumstances of the case in accordance with the law must be confirmed by certain means of proof can not be supported by any other evidence.

 

[artcol]

Syzransky, no shame, and you'll find your nonsense about lawyers 3-year-old, then it is important that you uttered after reading the internet

36. In accordance with Article 301 of the Civil Code a person applying to the court for the recovery of their property from illegal possession must prove their ownership of the property in the possession of the defendant.

37. In accordance with Article 302 of the Civil Code the defendant has the right to object to reclaim the property from his possession by presenting evidence of paid acquisition of property from a person who had no right to dispose of what he knew or should have known (bona fide purchaser).

For the purposes of the application of paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 302 of the Civil Code is not deemed to have received the purchaser for value property if the transferor has not received full payment or other compensation for the transfer of the property in question by the time when the purchaser knew or should have known of the illegality of alienation.

38. The acquirer recognizes conscientious, if he proves that he is in the transaction knew or should have known of the illegality of the alienation of the property by the seller, in particular to take all reasonable measures to ascertain the powers of the seller on the disposal of property.

The defendant may be considered a bona fide purchaser of the property, provided the transaction by which he gained possession of the property at issue meets the real deal in every way except that it is made unentitled transferor.

The owner has the right to refute the objection of the purchaser on his integrity, proving that the purchaser in the transaction was to question the right of the seller to dispose of the property.

39. Within the meaning of paragraph 1 of Article 302 of the Civil Code the owner has the right to reclaim his property from unlawful possession regardless of the defendant's objection that he is a bona fide purchaser, if he proves the fact of disposal of the property of its ownership or possession of the person to whom it was transferred to the owner, in addition to their will.

The invalidity of the transaction, pursuant to which the transferred property that is not in itself evidence of his retirement from the possession of the transferor is the property of a person against his will. Courts must establish whether the will of the owner to transfer ownership to another person.

Syzransky, byus for a mortgage - you're not even 10%did not understand what was written in the citation of the post.
But to work hard to understand - in life can come in handy.