English - Eulex

In all the fraudulent transaction cases, the claimants left their property in Kosovo in 1999 after the NATO
intervention and fled from Kosovo. At this stage the claimants’ ownership of the claimed property was
undisputed; the property was owned by the claimant or his/her close relatives. After the conflict the
claimants returned to Kosovo but found their property occupied by the respective respondents, who
produce transaction contracts with the claimants, based on which they claim their possession right. The
claimants seek the annulment of the respective property transaction contracts, alleging that they had
never sold their property to the respondents, and that the claimed transaction contracts were falsified.
In some of the cases the claimants even had a decision issued by the Housing and Property Claims
Commission (HPCC) or the Kosovo Property Claims Commission (KPCC) in their favour, and the respondents
had been evicted. However, the cadastral registers had not been corrected and therefore the respondents
still appeared to be the owners of the contested property, so the claimants had a legal interest in initial
court proceedings to change the title of ownership.
The main legal issue discussed in all cases was whether the claimant intentionally sold the property
to the respondent or if the property was illegally transferred without their knowledge using falsified
documents.
In order to decide whether or not the claimants gave their authorization to the sale by signing the disputed
powers of attorney, the court has assessed the following types of evidence:
-
Analysis of handwriting
The court, on the proposal of the claimant, ordered forensic examinations of the handwriting/fingerprints
on the power of attorney to compare them with the handwriting samples/fingerprints of the claimant.
The EULEX civil judge in Pejë/Peć has on several occasions asked the Kosovo Police forensic laboratory in
Pristina (in the past only used for criminal cases) to do the analysis 20 .
EULEX judges have also made use of analysis of handwriting previously obtained in the proceedings
before the quasi judicial Housing and Property Claims Commission (HPCC). By using the legal techniques
of collateral estoppel or issue preclusion, the court in several cases decided that the analysis performed in
the HPCC proceedings should also be valid in the fraudulent transaction proceedings 21 . This technique has
proven to be a very efficient way of speeding up the proceedings.
-
Death certificate
In a number of cases the claimant contended that the person who owned the disputed property and
appeared to have signed the power of attorney was in fact dead at the time of the sale. To check this, the court
20 See Municipal Court of Istog, Milos Nedeljkovic vs. Besim Fetahu & Hekuran Blakaj, C. No. 165/06, Judgment of 15
April 2009
21 See Municipal Court of Klina, Zivan Mazic vs. Bardhil Azem Marmullaku, C. No. 47/04, Judgment of 7 August 2009;
and Vladimir Radosavljevic vs. Tahir Morina, C. No. 48/04, Judgment of 7 April 2009
39