In a recent court ruling, the Republic of Serbia has been found liable for damages stemming from errors made by the Republic Geodetic Authority (RGZ) during the establishment of the Real Estate Cadastre. These mistakes led to the wrongful registration of property under another individual’s name rather than the rightful owner’s. The Appellate Court in Belgrade upheld the decision of the first-instance court, affirming that this error unjustly deprived the plaintiff of both ownership and possession of the property.
The case centers around a cadastral mistake that occurred after the plaintiff legally purchased two adjacent parcels of land in 2008. Despite meeting all contractual obligations and being properly registered as the owner, the RGZ’s Commission for Public Display of Real Estate Data and Rights erroneously listed the property under a different person’s name during the cadastral reform. This individual later transferred the property to their heirs, who, in turn, sold it to third parties acting in good faith, based on the official land registry records.
Court’s Reasoning
The court’s judgment was in favour of the plaintiff, holding the state responsible for damages caused by its agencies. The decision emphasised that the wrongful cadastral entry directly resulted in financial loss for the plaintiff, who was forced to pursue lengthy legal proceedings to rectify the situation.
While the court acknowledged the plaintiff’s rightful ownership, it dismissed claims against the new property owners, affirming that they had acquired the land in good faith, relying on the accuracy of cadastral records. Since the relevant law prioritises the protection of good-faith buyers who rely on official data, the plaintiff was left without a legal avenue to reclaim the land.
Compensation
The court ordered the state to compensate the plaintiff for financial losses caused by the cadastral error. Expert assessments valued the disputed property at approximately 3.7 million dinars (around EUR 32,000), which became the basis for determining the damages. The valuation was based on real estate market trends and price data from the Property Price Registry.
Implications
This ruling highlights the legal risks associated with cadastral errors and sets court practice for similar claims. Furthermore, property buyers and investors could be concerned about the reliability of land registry records, which can trigger more lawsuits if systemic issues within RGZ are not addressed. The case also underscores the necessity of implementing legislative reforms to ensure stronger protection for rightful property owners and to prevent similar disputes in the future.
The information in this document does not constitute legal advice on any particular matter and is provided for general informational purposes only.
