Perpetual Usufruct Research Articles

Legal status of tenants of reprivatized real properties in Warsaw

The article presents key issues regarding the status of the tenants of premises in real properties subject to the so-called court reprivatization based on the provisions of the decree of October 26, 1945 on ownership and use of land in the capital city of Warsaw. Municipal tenants are the group most affected by reprivatization. The jurisprudence of administrative courts most commonly presents the thesis that a former owner or his/her legal successors regaining the ownership of a building become parties to rental agreements which were concluded in the post-war period by the commune of the Capital City of Warsaw. This thesis is presented on the basis of Article 678 § 1 of the Civil Code, according to which in the event of the sale of a subject of rental, the buyer enters into the rights and obligations of the lessor in the place of the seller. Meanwhile, in the case of the real properties subject to reprivatization under the administrative procedure, a former owner or his/her successor in the event of failure to recognize the application for perpetual usufruct of a real property or in the event of the annulment of a decision to refuse to grant it has never lost ownership of the building. This denotes that municipal tenants previously were and currently are a party to agreements with the city, which, however, in practice, due to the restoration of power to the former right holders or their successors, cannot meet the provision of providing premises to a tenant. As a consequence, a given agreement neither passes to a person regaining the ownership of a building nor expires with the reprivatization of a real property. However, in practice, it cannot be effectively carried out, since the municipality of Warsaw, in the event of the return of a building to a former owner or his/ her successors, no longer has the property, and thus cannot legally effectively make it available to tenants. This, in turn, may result in the establishment of the liability of the city for damages towards the tenants. Due to the significant impact on the legal status of tenants, contrary to the previous jurisprudence of administrative courts, they should be considered as parties to reprivatization proceedings.

Prawo zabudowy jako alternatywa dla użytkowania wieczystego gruntów zabudowanych na cele mieszkaniowe

This article attempts to indicate an alternative right to perpetual usufruct, which pursuant the Act of 20 July 2018 on the transformation of the right of perpetual usufruct of land developed for building purposes into the right of ownership of such land, will be completely transformed into the right of ownership. Analyzing the draft act amending the Civil Code of 9 September 2009, was presented the possibility of introducing the leasehold law to the Polish legal system, which is partly modeled on the regulations of other European countries. The new limited property right, which is leasehold law, has been discussed in this article in terms of its creation, disposition, time and manner of its duration, confirming that it could be a whole alternative to perpetual usufruct.

ANALYSIS OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF LAWS ON THE TRANSFORMATION OF THE RIGHT OF PERPETUAL USUFRUCT INTO OWNERSHIP

The right of perpetual usufruct is one of the basic forms of public property management that brings systematic revenue to public entities. Before 1989, perpetual usufruct was practically the only possibility for natural persons to acquire public lands in cities. The changes of the political system triggered discussions on the legitimacy of this law, especially with regard to residential areas. Currently, there are two acts in force that regulate the transformation of the right of perpetual usufruct into full ownership title – The 2005 Act on transformation of the right of perpetual usufruct into ownership of real properties and The 2018 Act on transformation of the right of perpetual usufruct of land developed for housing purposes into ownership of this land.The aim of this research paper is a comparative analysis of the principles of transformation under the current procedure and pursuant to the Act of 2018, as well as the assessment of the scope of the implementation of the transformation process and the financial consequences for local government units and the State Treasury. Detailed research studies have been carried out on the example of a selected city based on the analysis of the proceedings carried out under the previous laws and on specifying the number of real properties and perpetual users covered by the transformation by virtue of law under the amended legislation, as well as the problems associated with the transformation fee.

Instytucja współdziałania w administracji w aspekcie rozwiązań prawnych dotyczących opiniowania operatów szacunkowych

Administrative decisions and other acts issued in the field of real estate management, e.g. in the case of expropriation of real estate or updating of fees for perpetual usufruct, require from the administrative authority that conducts the proceedings to assess the evidence prepared by expert property appraisers. The basic reason for cooperation in public administration is the necessity to provide substantial support in resolving cases requiring specialist knowledge or specific information. The aim of the article is to demonstrate that the legal regulation of the obligation to consult a professional body in the event of any doubts concerning substantive assessment of an appraisal report, will contribute to providing a more precise explanation of actual facts and resolving the case, in accordance with the rule of law and taking into account public interest and legitimate interests of parties.

The effect of perpetual usufruct on single-family houses in Poznań

The effect of perpetual usufruct on single-family houses in Poznań

Ownership as the prerequisite for the entitlement to claims arising from the Warsaw decree

The article presents the issue connected with the application of the mechanism of real property communalisation in Warsaw, raising a great deal of doubt in literature and diversely assessed in the case-law. The issue concerns the requirement adopted by the communist authorities in the decree of 26 October 1945 on ownership and usufruct of land on the area of Warsaw (so called the Warsaw decree) pursuant to which persons applying for (former) heritable building rights of superficies, and currently the right of perpetual usufruct were possessors of their former real properties. The decree communalised (nationalised) all land plots within Warsaw in order to rebuild the city destroyed by the war. A person fulfilling the condition of possession or their legal representative could have submitted within 6 months from taking possession of the land by the commune a request for establishing the right allowing the use of the real property compulsory taken over. Granting the possibility to submit requests for establishing the right to the land was to enable its former owners to take part in the reconstruction of the capital city. Granting the right involved essential obligations, for example in the form of the construction of a building or other facility as well as their maintenance in an appropriate condition. The main controversy concerns the fact whether the possession order as the condition for granting the right to use the land by the commune relates to former owners or only their legal successors (including mainly their heirs). If the interested party did not own the real property, they could not have claimed the right to establish the right to the land in an efficient way. The requirement concerning the ownership as the possibility to exercise efficiently the actual control over the real property was assessed under the rules of the Napoleonic Code applicable in the central parts of Poland, whereas later under the new Polish property law of 1946. The ownership as the condition for acquiring the right to the land was aimed at establishing the possibility to co-participate in the reconstruction of buildings destroyed as well as allowed the determination whether the persons entitled to the land were alive or had died during the years of war turmoil (in particular in the Holocaust). The article presents arguments for assuming the necessity to analyse the existence of the ownership lying with former owners (and not only with their legal successors). Nowadays, the problem is also essential due to practical reasons as requests submitted in the 1940s are being still currently processed, and failure to prove in that time the title to the land by requesters applying for granting the relevant right results also today in the necessity to reject establishing the right of perpetual usufruct.

Upływ terminu, na który zostało ustanowione użytkowanie wieczyste, a kwestia istnienia odrębnej własności lokalu

The main legal problem which is addressed in this article focuses on impact of expiry of the time limit of the perpetual usufruct of a property on the right of separate ownership of the premises in a building on the land kept in perpetual usufruct. The author collates two opposed theories and argues that the separate ownership of premises should expired also. This outlook was not shared by the Supreme Court in the seven judges’ Resolution of 25 August 2017, III CZP 11/17, therefor, the thesis from it are analyzed and criticized. In author’s opinion, the courts should pass in accordance with the rules (Article 235 § 2 CC in conjunction with Article 3(1) and Article 4(3) of the Act of 24 June 1994 on Ownership of Premises) and the judgments which refer to principles of equity should be marked negative.

Transferring real estate by means of a tender by local government units and the State Treasury

The Act of 21 August 1997 on real estate management specifies two modes in which real estate which is property of the State Treasury or of a local government unit can be transferred or given in perpetual usufruct – a tender and non-tender mode. The real estate resources are the basic assets element of the above-mentioned entities. They may be used for the purposes of development and organised investment activity, in particular for the construction of residential housing as well as implementing other public purposes. A tender procedure has been specified in the Polish law. A tender is the most optimal way to commit public property. The objective of this instrument consists in transactions involving public real estate according to universally applicable rules. It is a way which gives the greatest guarantee of security in terms of transferring immovable property assets.

Pozbawienie lub ograniczenie prawa własności jako formy wywłaszczenia nieruchomości

Expropriation of real estate consists in the deprivation or limitation of ownership by way of a decision; perpetual usufruct or other right in rem in real estate. It will therefore consist in limiting the owner’s rights to own, use and dispose of the thing. The greatest interference with our property will therefore be to take away the above-mentioned rights. However, expropriation of real estate is allowed only when it is carried out for public purposes and for just compensation.

Teoretyczne i praktyczne aspekty wyceny prawa użytkowania wieczystego gruntu

Celem artykułu jest porównanie zasad określania wartości gruntu w zależności od celu wyceny związanego z użytkowaniem wieczystym oraz wskazanie głównych problemów związanych z wyceną tego prawa. Zakres artykułu obejmuje problematykę wyceny dla następujących celów: oddania nieruchomości w użytkowanie wieczyste, aktualizacji opłat z tytułu użytkowania wieczystego, przekształcenia prawa użytkowania wieczystego w prawo własności oraz obrotu wtórnego użytkowaniem wieczystym. Do zrealizowania celu wykonano przegląd literatury i przepisów prawa oraz przeprowadzono ankietę wśród osób posiadających uprawnienia w zakresie szacowania nieruchomości. Uzyskane wyniki badań potwierdzają niedoskonałość przepisów regulujących zasady wyceny związanej z prawem użytkowania wieczystego, skutkujących odmiennym poziomem wartości w zależności od celu szacowania. Również w opinii rzeczoznawców majątkowych taka wycena przysparza trudności.

REAL ESTATE FEES DUE TO THE CHANGE IN ITS VALUE

The purpose of the article is to present the fees charged to property owners or perpetual usufructees for increasing the value of real estate they own or perpetual users. At the beginning, the basic concepts related to planning fees, also referred to as planning rents, adjacency payments and fees for perpetual usufruct were defined. The study presents the economic effects of these fees and who and for what purpose makes a valuation of the real estate. On the basis of legal acts concerning the discussed issue, the procedure of proceeding was also comprehensively presented, depending on the existing cause affecting the change in the value of the property.

A Generalised Model of Ground Lease Pricing

In this paper, we present a generalization of Mandell’s model for the estimation of ground lease pricing. We adjust the model so that it fits, in particular, the Polish legal regulations and situation of the Polish real estate market. The model involves two aspects. The first is the perpetual usufruct, a form of owning the ground similar to a long-term lease, but having some specific features. The second is allowing lease rent adjustments after some fixed period, meaning we consider the situation where the payments are fixed during certain periods as defined in the contract. The proposed model determines the minimum lease amount for the owner, which is the rate at which it is beneficial to lease the property, and the maximum for the lessee, which is the amount above which the lease is unprofitable for the leaseholder or perpetual usufruct.

Zasiedzenie fizycznej części nieruchomości oddanej w użytkowanie wieczyste

Użytkowanie wieczyste jest prawem na rzeczy cudzej o skomplikowanym charakterze prawnym. Jego przedmiotem może być wyłącznie nieruchomość należąca do Skarbu Państwa lub jednostki samorządu terytorialnego, czyli nieruchomość publiczna. Zasiedzenie nieruchomości państwowych było (na mocy art. 177 k.c.) wyłączone, co przesądzało o niemożliwości zasiedzenia własności nieruchomości oddanej w użytkowanie wieczyste. Po jego uchyleniu zniknęły normatywne przeszkody nabycia w drodze zasiedzenia własności nieruchomości oddanej w użytkowanie wieczyste. W niniejszej publikacji poddano analizie możliwość nabycia przez zasiedzenie własności fragmentu takiej nieruchomości. W pierwszej kolejności ustalono przedmiotową zdolność fizycznej części nieruchomości gruntowej do zasiedzenia. Ponadto przedstawiono poglądy kontestujące nabywanie przez zasiedzenie własności nieruchomości oddanych w użytkowanie wieczyste. Podniesione przez przeciwników argumenty zostały poddane krytyce. Wskazano również na skutki zasiedzenia w rozpatrywanym przypadku. Zbadano los użytkowania wieczystego na nabytym przez posiadacza fragmencie nieruchomości oraz na pozostałej właścicielowi części. Wskazano również na różne rodzaje odpowiedzialności użytkownika wieczystego.

Ownership and Perpetual Usufruct in the Valuation of Undeveloped Real Property on the Example of Parallel Markets

Abstract The paper presents an analysis of the trade in undeveloped real property in two cases: the ownership title and perpetual usufruct. The aim was to find the relation between the values of these rights in parallel markets, which allows to evaluate a better type of right to the property with a worse one. Such a solution is justified when the data is lacking in the local market. The solution is also frequently encountered in the practice of a property appraiser (Dobek, Suchoń, Wajszczuk, Wielicki, 2009). In the empirical study, the information used concerned the transactions concluded between the years of 2013‒2015 in two surveying precincts in Bydgoszcz district. In both cases, two different rights to property were traded, however, their percentage share in the total number of transactions was significantly different. It enabled to determine a correction factor for both types of rights to property. The analyses were preceded by the examination of concluded agreements, in particular, the characteristics of the traded real properties.

Uprawnienie do nieodpłatnego przekształcenia prawa użytkowania wieczystego w prawo własności nieruchomości

The current regulations allow specific categories of entities to lodge an application to convert the right of perpetual usufruct of these properties into property right. This entitlement is, in principle, payable. The legislator provided an exception to this principle by introducing the possibility of transforming the right of perpetual usufruct into a right of ownership free of charge. The legislator linked this right with a specific group of entities, justifying this by obtaining the perpetual usufruct right in exchange for expropriation or taking over the property for the benefit of the State Treasury. While this premise does not raise any doubts, much of the controversy arises from the notion of successor of authorized entities, used in art. 5 of the Act. The purpose of this article is to present current legal regulations related to the administrative and legal possibility of transforming the right of perpetual usufruct into the property right. The catalog of entities entitled to request a free transformation of the right of perpetual usufruct into the property right was analyzed, with particular reference to legal successors of authorized entities.

The Transformation of the right of perpetual usufruct into ownership

The article presents the most important provisions of the Act of 20 July 2018 on Transformation of the Right of Perpetual Usufruct of Land Developed for Housing Purposes into Ownership of Land. The transformation in question will take place ex lege as of 1 January 2019. This presentation is preceded by information about the possibility of transformation of the right of perpetual usufruct into ownership according to laws in force until 31 December 2018.

PRAWO UŻYTKOWANIA WIECZYSTEGO JAKO POZOSTAŁOŚć PO EPOCE SOCJALIZMU REALNEGO – UJęCIE SOCJOLOGICZNOPRAWNE

StreszczeniePrawo użytkowania wieczystego zostało wprowadzone do polskiego porządku prawnego w 1961 r., a zatem w okresie tzw. realnego socjalizmu. Do przyczyn wprowadzenia tej instytucji prawnej zaliczyć należy istotne czynniki polityczne i ideologiczne, a w szczególności realizację koncepcji, wedle której państwo socjalistyczne nie powinno zbywać gruntów na rzecz osób fizycznych i prawnych. Poza funkcjami polityczno-ideologicznymi, omawiana instytucja pełniła także określone funkcje społeczno-gospodarcze, do których należało m.in. udostępnianie osobom fizycznym oraz spółdzielniom mieszkaniowym gruntów pod budownictwo mieszkaniowe. Po transformacji ustrojowej w 1989 r. instytucja użytkowania wieczystego nie została wyeliminowana z polskiego porządku prawnego, występuje też w obrocie prawnym. W perspektywie socjologicznoprawnej wynika to przede wszystkim z dopasowania funkcji społecznych omawianej instytucji do zmienionych warunków po transformacji ustrojowej.

Z PROBLEMATYKI PRZEKSZTAŁCENIA PRAWA UŻYTKOWANIA WIECZYSTEGO W PRAWO WŁASNOŚCI

From the Problems of a Transformation from Perpetual Usufruct to Property RightSummaryAn analysis of a normative state and a practice of a conduct of legal transactions with reference to legal regulations of perpetual usufruct and also of a transformation of this right into property right permits a statement that in Polish Law there came into being a system of norms completely unintelligible, excessively complicated, internally contradictory, bureaucratic and too costly for the national budget, local governments and perpetual usufructuaries. The primary cause of the status quo was the lack of a clearly defined objective at which the legislator was aiming. Expediency was implemented at the expense of system principles. It led to interventions of the Constitutional Tribunal. The legislator hedged, made successive provisions not only internally contradictory but also arousing new doubts as to their compliance with the Constitution of the Republic of Poland.It seems that the only rational solution of the status quo is to forego the right of perpetual usufruct by enfranchising perpetual usufructuaries. However, it has to be a regulation based on foundations completely different than these hitherto existing.The transformation should cover all perpetual usufructuaries, regardless of the mode and the time of their acquisition of this right, and should ensue ex lege. This would result in a significant simplification of a construction of the transformation. Given a tremendous interest of perpetual usufructuaries in the transformation, it would significantly reduce the amount of office labour and attendant costs incurred by them. At the same time affranchisement would become universal. Further simplification and lowering costs of transformation would require that entries in mortgage registers should be evidenced ex officio at the time of the first transaction relating to a given mortgage register. Since affranchisement in a discussed mode would cover all perpetual usufructuaries ex lege, it would be obvious that persons evidenced in a register as perpetual usufructuaries are property owners until a new entry is made.There should be no exception from the basic principle of universality of affranchisement of perpetual usufructuaries. It has to be assumed that land charged with perpetual usufruct has not been indispensable for the hitherto existing owner (the State Treasury, local government units) in order to perform their basic tasks. In special cases these units may employ an expropriation.The most difficult problem of the hitherto existing regulations faced has been the question of compensation due to hitherto owners from the fact of a loss of ownership as a result of a transformation. I propose to regulate these settlements in such a way that an enfranchised perpetual usufructuary should be charged with such performances as he was charged with hitherto as a perpetual usufructuary. In other words: he would be charged with an obligation to pay annuity during a period for which he has been granted, the right to perpetual usufruct, transformed into property right. In exchange for a performance, which in any case he would have to provide as per agreement, the former perpetual usufructuary would obtain a better right - property right. According to the proposition under discussion, the regulation would have a system character, in a long-term it would allow to effect such a reform of public finances that hitherto existing owners could perform their assigned tasks financing them from performances of a tribute type, and not from perpetual usufruct. One would have to consider the advisability of maintaining in force the principles of determining an amount of an annuity. It seems that instead of the current system (expensive and inefficient) there should be introduced a principle of a yearly raising of annuity according to a rate of inflation.It’s common knowledge that appreciable part of immovables of the State Treasury and municipal immovables originate from different kinds of „expropriations” carried out in the period of PRL [People’s Republic of Poland]. To secure claims of former owners I propose to create a special fund, meant for indemnities satisfying these claims, from obligatory written off amounts gained from receipts from former perpetual usufructuaries.

Glosa do uchwały składu siedmiu sędziów Sądu Najwyższego z 13.7.2016 r. (III CZP 14/16)

Sąd Najwyższy uznał, że postępowanie administracyjne o ustanowienie prawa użytkowania wieczystego, przeprowadzone po stwierdzeniu nieważności decyzji odmawiającej ustanowienia własności czasowej nieruchomości objętej dekretem, nie przerywa biegu przedawnienia roszczenia o naprawienie szkody spowodowanej nieustanowieniem tego prawa. Z poczynionej analizy wynika, że stwierdzenie nieważności decyzji dekretowej następuje ex tunc i skutkuje ponownym rozpoznaniem wniosku na podstawie przepisów prawa materialnego. Ponadto poszkodowanemu, który poniósł szkodę na skutek wydania decyzji z naruszeniem art. 156 § 1 kodeksu postępowania administracyjnego , przysługuje odszkodowanie na podstawie art. 160 k.p.a. Postępowania te mają odrębną podstawę prawną, różnią się treścią. Poszkodowany na skutek wydania decyzji z naruszeniem art. 156 § 1 k.p.a. powinien dochodzić roszczenia z art. 160 § 1 k.p.a. po uzyskaniu ostatecznej decyzji stwierdzającej nieważność decyzji wydanej z naruszeniem prawa. W przeciwnym wypadku naraża się na utratę roszczenia na skutek upływu terminu przedawnienia.

Dopuszczalność obciążenia użytkowania wieczystego służebnością przesyłu

The article is an analysis of the issue of admissibility of encumbering the right of perpetual usufruct of land with transmission line easement. The analysis of the existing judiciary and doctrine in this matter, conducted in the article, as well as the current regulations lead the author to the conclusion that pursuant to applicable law there are no grounds for encumbering perpetual usufruct with transmission line easement due to the binding principle of numerus clausus of encumbering rights with limited proprietary rights, with the exception of the situation of encumbering perpetual usufruct, together with buildings and facilities on the leased land which is the property of the perpetual lessee, with transmission easement. At the same time, noticing the lack of regulation of the issue by the legislator, the author considers possible solutions, which leads him to the conclusion that the legislator should expressly have indicated in the act whether transmission easement should encumber merely the right of perpetual usufruct of land or also the property leased for perpetual usufruct, which, in the opinion of the author, is a more accurate solution.