The Supreme Court will review the approach to recognizing ownership rights to self-built buildings

The Supreme Court must determine who should be the proper defendant in disputes over the recognition of ownership rights to illegally reconstructed objects. This is a possible change in the judicial approach, according to which the state architectural and construction control body was considered the defendant in such cases.

The panel of judges of the Third Judicial Chamber of the Civil Court of Cassation, part of the Supreme Court, referred case No. 201/9731/24 to the Joint Chamber of the Civil Court of Cassation.

The reason was the need to harmonize judicial practice regarding who should act as the defendant in disputes over the ownership rights to illegally reconstructed real estate.

Why the Supreme Court wants to change the approach

Previously, in such disputes, the state architectural and construction control body could be determined as the proper defendant. This was explained by the fact that it has the authority in the field of control and acceptance of objects into operation.

However, the panel of the Supreme Court considers this approach to be erroneous in cases where the plaintiff does not appeal the decision of the control body and does not file material claims against it.

In fact, the court must distinguish between two categories of legal relations: a civil dispute over property rights and relations related to state architectural and construction control.

Who can become a proper defendant

The panel of judges proceeds from the fact that in a dispute about the recognition of property rights, such a defendant may be the owner of a land plot whose rights are related to unauthorized construction.

The final approach must now be formed by the Joint Chamber of the Civil Court of Cassation within the Supreme Court.

Its legal position may affect the further practice of considering cases regarding the recognition of property rights to unauthorizedly constructed or reconstructed real estate objects.