TRENDS IN COURT PRACTICE REGARDING THE PROTECTION OF PROPERTY RIGHTS TO FOREST LAND

Abstract

The article examines approaches to protecting property rights to forestry land developed by the Supreme Court in recent years. The relevance of the topic is due to the significant number of court cases concerning the return of illegally seized forestry land to state ownership, as well as the existence of different approaches to resolving such cases, mainly related to the lack of unity in determining the appropriate and effective means of protection.The analysis showed that the judicial practice of applying such methods of protecting the rights of the owner as reclamation of property from unlawful possession by another person (vindication claim) and removal of obstacles to the exercise of the right to use and dispose of property (negatory claim) had been established for a long time, but since 2018, it has undergone changes, in particular in cases concerning water fund lands and, subsequently, forestry lands.A summary of the provisions of the resolutions of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court and the courts of cassation gave grounds to identify the following trends in the resolution of such disputes.In judicial practice, two opposing approaches are used to address the issue of the appropriate method of protecting property rights to different categories of land (vindicatory or negative). The first approach involves distinguishing between the legal status of water fund lands and forestry lands based on the existence of legal grounds for acquiring them into private ownership. According to the second approach, lands in these categories are classified as being under special state protection, and there are restrictions on obtaining title ownership by a private individual.The Supreme Court makes a clear distinction between “right of ownership” and “actual possession” of immovable property, which is the decisive criterion for choosing between vindication and negatory remedies.The right of possession always belongs to the owner of the property and cannot be unlawful. Therefore, the owner has the right to reclaim their property from a person who has unlawfully taken possession of it without the appropriate legal basis. The person in whose name the ownership right is registered is recognized as the actual possessor. This actual situation may be lawful or unlawful. In cases where the owner has been unlawfully deprived of actual possession of a land plot and the state has registered the ownership rights of another person in relation to it, the ownership rights must be protected by means of a vindication claim. This approach should also apply to forestry land.When considering claims for the recovery of forestry land, it is important for the court to establish that the intervention in the right to peaceful possession of property meets three criteria of compatibility. The application of this method of protection requires an assessment of the good faith of the actions of the actual possessor.In cases concerning forestry land, in order to assess the good faith of the acquirer of the land plot, the court must take into account the presence of obvious external signs (tree vegetation) indicating that the plot belongs to the forest.Proposals have been made to improve the protection of property rights to forestry land.