The Journal of Critical Analysis of Judicial Decisions

The Journal of Critical Analysis of Judicial Decisions

Valid reference for dealing with a third-party complaint regarding executive operations (A look at the unification jugement Number 784 of the Supreme Court)

Document Type : A critique of a binding decision of the Cassation Court

Author
Esmaeil SHAYEGAN
خیر
10.22034/analysis.2023.2007647.1040
Abstract
Executive operations in the registration office may cause harm to the rights of a third party, similar to executive operations in the judiciary. In such cases, the authority for addressing the third-party complaint against the registration executive operations will vary depending on whether the third party's claim is supported by an official document, a court order, or an ordinary document. In the first two cases, the Registration of Deeds and Properties Office, relying on official documents and judicial orders, will suspend the executive operations and release the seized property. However, if the third party's claim is supported by an ordinary document, the registration office does not have the jurisdiction to address the legitimacy of the third party's rights, and the executive operations will not be halted except through the initiation of a third-party lawsuit and a court order. However, in certain exceptional cases, the registration authority suspends the effect and enforcement operations based on a regular document, according to a third party's claim. Nevertheless, despite the aforementioned subdivisions, a definite criterion for determining the court's jurisdiction in handling the third-party complaint will be the judicial nature of the objection
Keywords
Official document
ordinary document
third-party
court
registration office