There are a number of cases in practice where land properties restored to their owners under the restitution laws are still listed in the state property registers. That is, deeds for private state ownership were issued for them before and around 1990, meaning there are several ownership documents on file.
The existence of a state ownership deed, or the registration of the property as state-owned, necessitates an analysis and a procedure for deregistering the properties, or removing them from the state ownership registry. In most cases, owners become aware of the existence of a state ownership deed for their property after obtaining a certificate from the regional governor of the relevant region regarding the presence or absence of such a deed, as it is possible that the property is part of a property for which a state ownership deed has been issued by the relevant People’s Council. The conclusion is that the property has not been properly removed from the state ownership registers.
There are cases involving properties that have been restored to their owners by a final decision of a land commission and by an order issued and entered into force pursuant to Article 16 of the Spatial Planning Act (i.e., with an approved detailed development plan – PUP), which have not been removed from the land registry. Pursuant to Article 16 of the Spatial Planning Act, this PUP determines the areas required for the construction of green space facilities, social infrastructure, and technical infrastructure—all of which are public property. This procedure specifically designates a regulated plot of land (UPI), allocating part of the property for public use, but at the same time, it turns out that a Certificate of Ownership (ADS) has been issued for the land parcel. The question arises as to whether properties regulated under Article 16 of the Spatial Development Act are subject to deregistration under the Land Registry Act, given that under Article 16 of the Spatial Development Act, new (regulated) properties are created that differ from the land parcel that existed prior to the plan’s approval.
The very fact that the properties were restored and returned to their former owners prior to nationalization leads to the conclusion that the grounds for registration have ceased to exist. The law requires that there be sufficient evidence of the existence of any of the conditions for removal from the registry books and that the private individual’s right of ownership be established beyond doubt.
The procedure and method for deregistering registered properties are governed by the State Property Act and its implementing regulations.
Competent authority:
- the regional governor of the relevant region, by order of deregistration
Reasons:
The deregistration of a property as state property is preceded by the fact that it has ceased to be state property, i.e., ownership has been transferred to another legal entity.
The applicant must submit written evidence proving that the property is owned by him or her; that is, he or she must provide evidence of the basis for acquisition—a restitution decision, a certificate of heirs, an order under Article 16 of the Spatial Development Act, a notarial deed, or another document of title.
By order of the regional governor of the area where the property is located, the following properties are to be removed from the registry:
- properties that are no longer state-owned
- properties that were incorrectly registered as such,
- properties for which the basis for registration no longer exists.
If, based on the evidence presented, the competent authority determines that the property is not state-owned, it shall issue an order for the property to be removed from the registry of state-owned properties. Within one month of the issuance of the order, the regional governor shall notify in writing and send a copy of the order to the agency to which the right to manage the removed property has been granted.
If the competent authority determines that there is insufficient evidence to establish the existence of any of the conditions for removal from the land registry, or if the person who requested the removal of the property cannot conclusively prove their right of ownership, the competent authority shall issue an order refusing to remove the state-owned property from the land registry.
Procedure for removal from the registry:
The deregistration of properties is carried out upon written request by the owner submitted to the regional governor.
The owner must attach written evidence to the request proving that the property is owned by him or her. It is recommended to provide an analysis of the property’s history, including relevant documents such as zoning and cadastral records in cases where the property numbers have changed, in order to ensure the timely issuance of the requested order. It is recommended to attach a certificate of no municipal ownership from the relevant municipality/district.
Appeal of a refusal to deregister
An explicit refusal to remove a property from the registry of state-owned properties is not subject to appeal in court under the Administrative Procedure Code.
The consistent and unambiguous case law of the Supreme Administrative Court holds that entries and deletions in the state property registers do not affect the rights and legitimate interests of third parties, and the orders by which state-owned properties are registered or deregistered—or the refusals (express or implied) to issue such orders—do not constitute individual administrative acts and are therefore not subject to judicial review. This activity is regarded as an internal administrative function for the registration, accounting, and management of state-owned property. The registration or deregistration of real estate in the state property registers does not have a constitutive character and does not give rise to rights or obligations, nor does it affect legitimate interests.
For this reason, the administrative authority’s denial of a request for deregistration is not subject to appeal.
However, the facts stated in the certificate of state ownership are presumed to be true until proven otherwise. Therefore, anyone who believes that their private property has been incorrectly registered as state property may assert their right of ownership through the general legal proceedings. This means that a property dispute must be brought before a civil court.
