Recently we have received a statement of reasons for the Supreme Court’s decision of 13 November 2020 which upheld in full the cassation appeal filed by our lawyers from the dispute resolution team in an unusual case that originated at the land and mortgage registry court (IV CSK 344/19).
The conclusion that may be drawn from this statement of reasons is that a warning about a discrepancy between the content of the land and mortgage register and the actual legal status is not an obstacle to making an entry of a compulsory mortgage.
As part of the litigation concerning claims of a Client that has suffered as a result of acts of unfair competition (committed by its former employee, in fact by a company controlled by him and its management board), we obtained a final and binding injunction of the Court of Appeal in Warsaw on securing claims for damages by encumbering a number of real properties owned by the defendants with a joint compulsory mortgage.
Despite the presentation of a final and binding injunction, the Land and Mortgage Registry Court, and later the Court of Appeal, refused to enter this mortgage in the land and mortgage register, which contained a warning that some plots of land were owned by the county (local government).
The Supreme Court agreed with us that the view of the Courts of first and second instance is wrong and it violates the rights of the mortgagor. The Supreme Court fully shared our view that a warning does not restrict the disposal of real estate, and entry of a warning is not an obstacle to making an entry of a mortgage.