Kaunas Municipality Defies court Order, Refuses to Sell Apartment at Judged Price
Kaunas, Lithuania – A protracted legal battle has concluded with a court ruling ordering teh Kaunas District Municipality to sell an apartment for €44,133.10, yet the municipality remains non-compliant, leaving a resident in legal limbo. Zita, the tenant involved, alleges the municipality is deliberately stalling the sale despite a final, enforceable judgment issued last October. The case highlights a potential conflict between local government authority adn judicial rulings, raising concerns about the enforceability of court decisions for citizens.
The dispute began when the municipality sought to exercise its legal right to redeem Zita’s apartment, initially offered for sale in 2023. While offered at market price, Zita contested the municipality’s valuation, triggering a series of appraisals and ultimately, a court fight. The core of the issue revolves around the apartment’s assessed value: the municipality’s appraiser initially set the price at €62,000, later offering €58,372.96. Zita’s independent assessor, however, determined the apartment’s value to be €20,000 lower.
According to Zita, the Kaunas District Court and subsequently the Kaunas Regional Court sided with her assessment, ordering the municipality to sell the apartment for €44,133.10. “The court awarded his own examination. The price of the assessor set by my hired evaluator differed from the assessment of the forensic expert € 2,000,” Zita stated. The Supreme Court of Lithuania refused to hear the municipality’s appeal, solidifying the Regional Court’s ruling.
Despite the final judgment, the municipality has taken no action to initiate the sale. Zita reports that the municipality only reimbursed her legal expenses and has ignored requests from both herself and her lawyer, Diana Višinskienė, to proceed with a sales transaction through a notary. “The municipality did not take any action, did not comply with the lawful and entry into force of the judgment,” Zita said, expressing frustration with the ongoing inaction.
The case now raises questions about the mechanisms for enforcing court orders against municipal entities and the potential recourse available to citizens when faced with governmental non-compliance.
