Background

A bank filed a case against a defendant before the civil court requesting the defendant vacate a disputed flat. The bank said that the building where the flat was located needed improvements and the defendant had refused to vacate the flat.

The court ruled that the defendant should vacate the flat.

The defendant appealed the ruling before the court of appeal. The court dismissed the appeal and upheld the appealed ruling.

Decision

The defendant appealed the ruling before the court of cassation and said in his grounds of appeal that the ruling had violated the right of defence and had insufficient evidence of causation and that the improvement in the building did not require his eviction from the flat. The defendant said that there were many flats in the building but the bank had requested him only to vacate his flat.