Varna Mayor Blagomir Kotsev is suing himself. The curious case is clear from the website of the Court of Appeal in Varna.
Mayor Kotsev and businessman Blagomir Kotsev are suing themselves for the same thing, but from two different positions.
The municipality is suing Kotsev's family company "Overseas – Horizon", which he managed before being mayor. The dispute is about movable objects next to the "Horizon" restaurant in the Sea Garden in the city.
In 2022, the chief architect of the municipality, Viktor Buzev, issued a permit for the placement of tents next to the restaurant, which were used by customers. At that time, the mayor of the city was Ivan Portnykh. In this case, it is about an additional permit, and the question is whether the space is being used legally and if so, how much of it. The District Prosecutor's Office initiated proceedings against the chief architect's permit. Subsequently, the court declared the chief architect's act null and void. However, the tents were not removed, because the company appealed.
Later, Blagomir Kotsev became the mayor of the city, and in 2024, the Supreme Administrative Court ruled in favor of the tents. Thus, the businessman Kotsev won against Mayor Kotsev.
After an appeal, the Court of Appeal - Varna decided that the first instance was partially right - the company should transfer possession of 2 properties to the Varna municipality, as well as pay 359,338.79 leva. The decision is subject to appeal before the Supreme Court of Cassation.
Here is the entire decision of the court:
The Varna Court of Appeal partially overturned a decision of the District Court – Varna in a case regarding the placement of movable objects in Primorski Park, Saltanat area. The second instance sentenced a commercial company to transfer to the Municipality of Varna the possession of 2 properties with a total area of 3,557 sq. m. and to pay it 359,338.79 leva. The amount represents compensation for unjust enrichment of the defendant at the expense of the plaintiff. The funds are expenses saved by the defendant for the use of the entire properties in the period from 30.08.2018 to 17.01.2022, and in the period 18.01.2022 - 30.08.2023 – for the real parts of them, falling outside the area of the movable objects and the area necessary for their use, totaling 758.99 sq. m.
The higher instance confirmed the decision of the District Court in the parts by which the claims for the transfer of the real parts of the properties occupied by the movable objects and the area necessary for their use were rejected, as well as for the payment of compensation in the amount of 416,477.80 BGN.
The proceedings before the Court of Appeal were initiated upon appeals by the State, represented by the MRDPW, through the regional governor, and by the Municipality of Varna. In the case, it is undisputed that the properties in question are private state property, provided by the State to the municipality for free management in 2016. In the period from 30.08.2018. by 30.08.2023 the defendant has placed 10 movable objects and facilities for trade. Forensic and technical expertise has established that in addition to the specified objects and facilities, there is an additional occupied area with commercial purpose and elements of the technical infrastructure.
In its claim, the plaintiff - Varna Municipality - claims that the use of the properties has unreasonably enriched the defendant, because it did not have a contractual relationship with the owner of the property and his consent. In addition, it uses the properties in their entirety, and not only the parts in which the movable objects are located. As a result, the municipality is deprived of the opportunity to exercise actual power over them and derive their civil fruits, and the defendant has saved himself the rent that he should have paid. The municipality insists that he be sentenced to hand over possession of the properties and pay it compensation for their unjustified use. The state, through the regional governor, claims that the claims will be honored. The defendant claims that he uses the properties in accordance with the permit for the placement of the movable objects and in accordance with the adopted placement scheme, approved and coordinated with the municipality and the regional administration.
The Court of Appeal accepted that during the trial period the defendant company was a holder, exercising actual power over the two properties. For the period 30.08.2018-17.01.2022. the use is without grounds. On 18.01.2022. the chief architect of the municipality issued the company a permit to place 10 movable objects and facilities. The placement scheme was approved by the ESUT, coordinated with the chief architect of the municipality and the regional governor. The owner of the real estate - the State and the municipality, to which they were provided for management and management, did not exercise their right to appeal the administrative act. The court accepted that the defendant currently holds the movable objects on the trial properties on a valid basis - a valid and effective administrative act - a permit to place movable objects on the land properties. The permit issued under the Black Sea Coast Development Act does not provide for the payment of fees for the placement of the facilities. However, the area outside the movable objects and necessary for their use is used by the defendant without reason. It is for this that the compensation is due in the period 18.01.2022 - 30.08.2023. The amount of impoverishment from the use without reason is determined on the basis of the average monthly market rent indicated by experts. The awarded amount amounts to 359,338.79 and is due together with the statutory interest from the date of filing the claim.
The decision is subject to appeal before the Supreme Court of Cassation.