The concept of “land plot” is a cornerstone of the science of land law. Although almost all definitions of a land plot relate it to a certain part of the earth’s surface, a number of theoretical and practical questions arise concerning different descriptions of a land plot in certain documents, in the State Land Cadastre (SLC) and its designation in-situ (on the ground). There are also questions of a more fundamental nature with regard to the legal meaning of different descriptions.

This article aims at clarifying the legal nature of a land plot description and the rights to it which are available, on the one part, in SLC and the State Register of Proprietary Rights to Immovable Property and Their Encumbrances, and on the other part – its designation in-situ, appropriate means of protection determined against the possibility of a land plot’s improper description or its incorrect in-situ marking.

It is established that errors, discrepancies and inaccuracies in the cadastral description of boundaries, as well as in the in-situ marking of design plots are unavoidable. Under today’s conditions, the register of rights based on the land plot description available in the cadastre is a tool of the so-called “record-based or book ownership”. The person recorded in the register is always the “book owner”, but it is not necessarily that he/she is the possessor (the holder of another right specified in the register). It ensues from this general thesis that land plot boundaries in the register (“on paper”) are not necessarily correct as well. And the boundaries shown “in-situ” (on the ground) are also not always correct, without even mentioning that the actual situation often does not allow determining clearly where a boundary passes.

A land plot is an object which may be described in various ways: using a list of boundary turning points in the database, using boundary markers in-situ, using a link to the postal address and area, and so on. However, land plot description in databases (registers), as well as its making in-situ will inevitably involve errors and discrepancies. Given this, any description of a land plot should not be absolutized. Among practical issues pertaining to land plot description, the issue of so-called “overlaps” should be highlighted. If it is impossible to settle this issue without a dispute, vindication is the appropriate remedy in such a case. Following a court judgment in favor of the party requesting vindication, appropriate changes should be made to SLC.

Bibliography

Authored books

1. Hoshko Yu, Zvychaieve pravo naselennia Ukrainskykh Karpat ta Prykarpattia XIV– XIX st. [Law of Custom of the Ukrainian Carpathians and Subcarpathia Population in the XIV–XIX Centuries] (1999) (in Ukrainian).

2. Trehub M, Formuvannia prostorovoi informatsii dlia derzhavnoho zemelnoho kadastru [Forming of Spatial Information for the State Land Cadastre] (NHU 2014) (in Ukrainian).

Edited books

3. Homer, Iliada [Iliad] (Ten B per, Folio 2006) (in Ukrainian).

4. Naukovo-praktychnyi komentar Zemelnoho kodeksu Ukrainy [Scientific and Practical Commentary on the Land Code of Ukraine] (Medvedchuk V zah red, Yurinkom Inter 2004) (in Ukrainian).

5. Selo Stolne u druhii polovyni XVIIIst. (za materialamy Heneralnoho opysu Livoberezhnoi Ukrainy 1765–1769 rr.) [Stolne Village in the Second Half of XVIII Century (Based on the General Description of the Left-Bank Ukraine in 1765–1769)] (Kazimirov D ta Tokariev S uporiadnyky 2016) (in Ukrainian).

6. Zemelne pravo Ukrainy: pidruchnyk [Land Law of Ukraine: Textbook] (Shulha M red, Yurinkom Inter 2004) (in Ukrainian).

Journal articles

7. Karpinskyi Yu, ‘Systemotekhnichni aspekty formuvannia topolohichnoho zemelnokadastrovoho pokryttia’ [‘System and Technical Aspects in the Forming of Topological Land Cadastral Coverage’] (2015) 5–6 Visnyk heodezii i kartohrafii 62–8 (in Ukrainian).

8. Kucevich O, ‘“Nakladki” zemel’nyh uchastkov pri ih opisanii v Gosudarstvennom zemel’nom kadastre: pravovye posledstvija i sposoby predotvrashhenija’ [‘“Overlaps” of Land Plots Description in the State Land Cadastre: Legal Consequences and Ways of Preventing Them’] (2015) 2/3 Legea Si Viata (in Russian).

9. Miroshnychenko A ta Popov Yu ta Ripenko A, ‘Zemelni dilianky: vindykatsiia, restytutsiia, kondyktsiia, vyznannia prav (spivvidnoshennia ta deiaki problemni pytannia)’ [‘Land Plots: Vindication, Restitution, Condictio, Recognition of Rights (Correlation and Some Topical Issues)’] (2012) 16 Chasopys Akademii advokatury Ukrainy 8 (in Ukrainian).

10. Miroshnychenko A, ‘Obrannia nalezhnoho sposobu zakhystu prav na zemelni dilianky’ [‘Choosing an Appropriate Remedy for Land Rights Protection’] [2011] 1 (124) Advokat 27–8 (in Ukrainian).

11. Popov Yu, ‘Systema reiestratsii prav na nerukhomist: neobkhidne i dostatnie vrakhuvannia spetsyfiky knyzhkovoho volodinnia’ [‘The System of Real Estate Rights Registration: Essential and Sufficient Regard for the Specifics of Record-Based Ownership’] (2015) 14 Ukrainske komertsiine pravo 68 (in Ukrainian).

Dissertations

12. Yasinska L, ‘Stanovlennia ta rozvytok instytutu notariatu v Ukraini (istoryko-pravovyi aspekt)’ [‘Establishment and Development of the Institute of Notaries in Ukraine (Historical and Legal Aspect)’] (dys kand yuryd nauk, 2005) (in Ukrainian).

Websites

13. ‘Derzhheokadastr vidkryv dlia sertyfikovanykh inzheneriv-zemlevporiadnykiv koordynaty povorotnykh tochok mezh zemelnykh dilianok’ [‘State Geocadastre Has Opened the Coordinates of Turning Points of Land Boundaries for Certified Land Surveyors’] (Derzhheokadastr) <https://land.gov.ua/derzhheokadastr-vidkryv-dliasertyfikovanykhinzheneriv-zemlevporiadnykiv-dani-pro-koordynaty-povorotnykhtochokmezh-zemelnykh-dilianok> (accessed: 23.03.2020) (in Ukrainian).

14. Medynska N, ‘Hariacha profesiina dyskusiia na fakulteti zemlevporiadkuvannia’ [‘Intense Professional Discussion at the Land Management Faculty’] (NUBiP Ukrainy, 08.02.2019) <https://nubip.edu.ua/node/55928> (accessed: 23.03.2020) (in Ukrainian).