Cadastre, Land Registry Record Errors and Allegations of Acquisitive Prescription
Allegations that the cadastral determination is contrary to the facts, that the land registry record was kept erroneously as to boundaries, surface area or owner information, or that ownership of the property was acquired through long-term possession may be subject to special time-limit and proof rules.
In this context:
- Objections to the cadastral determination and actions based on pre-cadastral grounds
- Rectification of owner, identity, boundary and surface area information
- Duplicate or overlapping land registry records
- Properties without title deeds and allegations of extraordinary acquisitive prescription
- Examining maps, cadastral sheets, survey plans, aerial photographs and technical measurement records
- Disputes connected with claims concerning forest, coastal land, pasture, the Treasury and public property
Because disputes arising from the cadastre or from the character of public property may be subject to preclusive periods and special jurisdiction rules, the basis of the file must be determined separately.
Losses Arising from the Keeping of the Land Registry and Compensation Claims
Where ownership cannot be recovered because the land registry was kept unlawfully or erroneously, or the loss cannot be remedied by correcting the land registry record, a compensation claim may arise under the State’s liability for the keeping of the land registry and other grounds of liability.
In this context:
- Losses arising from erroneous land registry and cadastral transactions
- The actual rightholder’s inability to recover ownership
- The position of a third party who acquired a right in reliance on the land registry
- Determining the loss, the causal link and the ground of liability
- Determining the value of the property and the date of the loss
- The relationship between the claim to cancel the title and the compensation claim
The respondent to the compensation claim, the competent court with subject-matter and territorial jurisdiction, and the time limits are assessed separately according to the source of the loss.
A Clerical Error and an Ownership Dispute Are Not the Same
Correcting a name or identity detail and removing another person’s ownership are different claims. The possibility of administrative correction, the parties’ consent and the judicial route are determined by the type of record. The character of public property and the legal ground that predates the cadastre are examined separately.
Long use alone does not confer ownership
The registration status of the property, its character, the conditions of possession and special statutes are decisive. The provisions on acquisitive prescription cannot be applied to every immovable property. The fact that the owner has died does not by itself allow the property to be registered in the name of the person using it.
Framing the compensation alternative
Liability arising from the keeping of the registry under Article 1007 of the TMK is distinguished from claims based on contract or tort. The occurrence of the loss, the causal link, the respondent, the valuation date and the time limits are examined according to the basis of each claim.