The Supreme Court explained whether a land lease agreement can be considered not concluded if the signature is not on all pages

The Civil Cassation Court of the Supreme Court denied the landowner’s claim for the return of the land, having established that the parties reached an agreement on the terms of the lease agreement. The court noted that the absence of a signature on certain pages of the agreement alone does not indicate that it was not concluded if other evidence confirms the party’s will.

The Supreme Court considered a dispute regarding a land plot of over 20 hectares, whose owner claimed that she did not sign the lease agreement and did not agree to transfer the land for use.

A forensic handwriting examination established that the signatures on some pages of the agreement were not made by the landowner, but the signatures on other pages of the document belong to her.

The Civil Cassation Court upheld the appellate court’s decision, which denied the claim to return the land plot and cancel the state registration of the lease right.

Case circumstances

The landowner filed a lawsuit against the lessee demanding the return of the land and cancellation of the state registration of the lease right.

She stated that she did not conclude the land lease agreement because she did not sign the document in full. According to her, a copy of the agreement was not handed over to her, and therefore the lessee used the land without proper legal grounds.

In December 2019, a land lease agreement for a term of 12 years was executed between the landowner and the lessee. The lease right was registered in the State Register of Property Rights to Real Estate.

The plaintiff requested to remove obstacles to the use of the land by returning it and canceling the state registration of the lease right.

What the courts established

The court of first instance satisfied the claim.

The Bobrynets District Court of Kirovohrad region reasoned that the lease agreement was not concluded because the landowner did not sign it and therefore did not express her will to create contractual legal relations.

However, the Kropyvnytskyi Court of Appeal overturned this decision and issued a new ruling denying the claim.

The appellate court found that a land lease agreement was executed between the parties, as well as acts of transfer and acceptance of the land plot and determination of its boundaries in nature.

An important piece of evidence in the case was the conclusion of the forensic handwriting examination.

The expert established that the signatures on the first and second pages of the agreement purportedly from the landowner were made not by her but by another person with some imitation of her genuine signatures.

At the same time, the signatures on the third and fourth pages of the agreement were made directly by the landowner.

Considering these circumstances, the appellate court concluded that the landowner expressed her will to conclude the agreement and agreed to its essential terms.

This decision was appealed to the Supreme Court.

Position of the Supreme Court

The Civil Cassation Court of the Supreme Court agreed with the conclusions of the appellate court and left its decision unchanged.

The court noted that an agreement is concluded if the parties properly agree on all essential terms of the contract.

For a land lease agreement, such terms include, in particular, the lease object, the term of the agreement, the amount and procedure for payment of rent.

The Supreme Court emphasized that the law requires the agreement to be in writing and signed by the parties but does not require mandatory signing of every page of the document.

Therefore, the absence of a signature on a separate page of the agreement alone does not mean that the agreement is not concluded.

When resolving such disputes, courts must evaluate all evidence as a whole and determine whether the parties reached an agreement on the terms of the contract and whether the party’s will corresponded to its internal intention.

Signature on part of the agreement and other evidence confirmed the owner’s will

The Supreme Court noted that in this case, circumstances confirming the conclusion of the lease agreement were established.

In particular, the examination confirmed the authenticity of the landowner’s signatures on some pages of the agreement. In addition, the parties signed acts of transfer and acceptance of the land plot, and the lease right was registered in the prescribed manner.

The panel of judges noted that the expression of will by the party is a necessary condition for concluding a transaction. In this case, it is confirmed not only by the signatures in the agreement but also by a combination of other evidence.

The Supreme Court also noted that this case differs from other disputes where courts found the absence of a concluded land lease agreement. In this case, other factual circumstances were established, including the presence of genuine signatures of the owner on part of the agreement and documents regarding the transfer of the land plot for lease.

Regarding rent payment: The Supreme Court corrected an inaccuracy in the appeal

The Supreme Court separately drew attention to the erroneous statement in the appellate court’s ruling that the landowner received rent payments under the agreement from 2019 to 2023.

The Civil Cassation Court of the Supreme Court established that the case materials contain no evidence that the landowner received such funds.

At the same time, the court noted that this inaccuracy does not affect the correctness of the appellate court’s conclusion, as the decision to deny the claim was based on other evidence.

The courts took into account the expert’s conclusion, the presence of the landowner’s signatures on part of the agreement, the signing of the land transfer acts, and the state registration of the lease right.

Conclusion of the Supreme Court

The Civil Cassation Court of the Supreme Court dismissed the cassation appeal and left the decision of the Kropyvnytskyi Court of Appeal unchanged.

In case 383/1513/23, the Supreme Court stated that the absence of a party’s signature on certain pages of a land lease agreement alone does not indicate that it was not concluded. To establish the fact of conclusion of the agreement, all circumstances must be evaluated as a whole, including the presence of the party’s signature, agreement on essential terms of the contract, and other evidence of will.

Subscribe to our Telegram channel t.me/sudua and on Google News SUD.UA, as well as on our VIBER and WhatsApp, our page on Facebook and on Instagram to stay informed about the most important events.