Proceedings relating to adjustment of annual fees for perpetual usufruct of land, which are regulated in the Act of 21 August 1997 on Property Management, have a special nature. Although they concern a civil law phenomenon, that is, perpetual usufruct of land, the power to adjudicate in cases of this kind at the first, administrative, stage of proceedings was vested with local government board of appeals, that is, public administration authorities. It is an exceptional situation in administrative law. Moreover, even at the stage carried out by local government boards of appeals, the proceedings relating to fee adjustment do not have a purely administrative character, but display a mixed, civil and administrative character. This is proven, among other things, by the fact that the right to appeal the board’s decision is enjoyed not only by the perpetual usufructuary, but also the owner of the land. For these reasons, the legal construction of annual perpetual usufruct fee adjustment, as adopted in the Act on Property Management, gives rise to a number of doubts relating to its application. They appear both in the practice of local government boards of appeals and in the judgments of civil and administrative courts. The aim of the study is to show how the particularities of this procedure affect one of the fundamental rights of the individual, i.e. the right to a fair trial (before a competent court), and to determine whether the solutions provided by the law give sufficient guarantee of its fulfilment. The answers should be sought mainly in case law of administrative courts. In the author’s opinion, an analysis of this case law leads to the conclusion that a case concerning adjustment of the annual fee, despite the particularities of the proceedings, remains a civil case at every stage. This in turn leads to the conclusion that it is unjustified for the local government boards of appeal to issue decisions ending the proceedings in such matters in a formal manner, i.e. decisions of a purely administrative nature.