The constitutional court defended the rights of owners of land within the boundaries of cultural objects

law Enforcement situation that required compliance with the Constitution, has arisen around section 57 of the Land code of the Russian Federation. The article provides for the reimbursement of losses caused to the citizen the change of the target purpose of the land. However, Irina Butrimova courts was refused on the grounds that it was a limitation of the right of ownership “on other grounds”. The fact that in 2009 in the rural village of Savinskaya woman purchased a plot for individual housing construction cadastral value of the land at that time was 5.8 million rubles. And in 2015, the government of the Novgorod region issued a decree about the statement of borders of zones of protection of object of a cultural heritage of Federal importance Varlamov Khutyn monastery, the ruins of which date from the XVI century. The plot of Irene, trapped in their borders, became “shared” with the value 1 ruble. And on private land is now banned not only the construction with the change of the dimensions of the buildings, but even the orchards, blocking the view of the monastery.

Photo: iStock the Ministry of construction as the regions where the most expensive housing

the Position of Supreme legal authority of the country justified by the previous decisions of the COP, therefore, the judgment rendered without holding a public hearing. First of all judges are reminded that the sanctity of private property rights is one of the foundations of the constitutional system of Russia. Although the state may interfere in such relationship, however, any action of this kind must not be arbitrary. While the protection of cultural heritage should also be considered as constitutional values. The preamble of the Constitution enshrines the respect for the “memory of ancestors who have conveyed to us love and respect for the Fatherland”. The balance of personal and public interests in such cases requires strict compliance with “constitutional based principles of justice, reasonableness and proportionality”.

Article 35 of the Constitution requires a prior and fair compensation in case of forced alienation of property for state needs, reminded the COP. The question of the grounds for such compensation in connection with the ownership restrictions on land sets Land code, but the restrictions can be called as unlawful and lawful actions of state authorities. These differences in law are not defined, as evidenced by the lack of uniformity in judicial practice and the discrepancies in opinion between the representatives of legislative and Executive power in the constitutional court.

the Cadastral value of the land at the time of purchase amounted to 5.8 million rubles. But in 2015 year the site Irina depreciated to one ruble

based on the above arguments the court decided to consider the provisions of article 57 of the Land code of the Russian Federation not corresponding to the Constitution of the Russian Federation, as they are in the case of legitimate actions of the authorities “because of their uncertainty does not allow to unambiguously determine the terms of compensation.” The Federal legislator is tasked to finalize the provisions of the code and related regulations situation. However Irina Butrimova should be reviewed before the entry of these changes.

– Continue to make the appropriate changes to the basis for compensation of losses caused to land owners by limiting their rights to the land by a public authority or local authority by reason of the lawful establishment or change of zones of protection of object of a cultural heritage, is the very existence of damages caused by lawful actions of that organ, decided by the COP.