Improving Ownership of the Land

Tyumen State University Herald. Social, Economic, and Law Research


2018, Vol. 4. №1

Improving Ownership of the Land

For citation: Ulyanov D. V. 2018. “Improving Ownership of the Land”. Tyumen State University Herald. Social, Economic, and Law Research, vol. 4, no 1, pp. 145-158. DOI: 10.21684/2411-7897-2018-4-1-145-158

About the author:

Dmitriy V. Ulyanov, Postgraduate Student, Department of Civil Law and Procedure, Institute of State and Law, University of Tyumen;


This article analyzes the current triad of the proprietary rights in the Russian Federation. That includes the content of the existing rights: possession, use, and disposal. The author notes that the ownership of the land is not as absolute. He looks into the compulsory acquisition of the land for the state and municipal needs, which restricts owners’ rights. The paper provides opinions of the contemporary scholars and specialists in the given area.

The author has analyzed the modern legislation and court practice on the issue. The analyzed examples of the modern court practice show that the acquisition of the land for the state and municipal needs violates owners’ rights, as the procedure is not followed. In some cases, the owners receive unequal or no compensation for the confiscated land, or they are not notified in due time. Thus, the landowners have no opportunity to return the confiscated lands.

This article highlights the importance of observing both the state’s and land owners’ interests. The authors explains the imperfection of the existing triad of landowners’ rights and proves the need for the inclusion of protective warrants in case of land’s compulsory acquisition in the state and municipal needs. That should 1) establish certain ownership protection guarantees for individuals and legal entities, 2) correspond to the principles of legality, equality, and inviolability of ownership, and 3) guarantee the integrity of ownership (which is, according to Art. 2 of the RF Constitution, a direct duty of the state). The article emphasizes a special role of the protective warrant to ensure legality of rights and the interests of citizens. The author formulates specific proposals to improve the civil legislation of land acquisition in the state and municipal needs to protect owners’ rights. He also designates and proposes solutions to one of the significant problems in understanding the ownership right: the absence of a clear definition of the term “land” in the legislation.


  1. Aksyenenok G. A. 1950. Pravo gosudarstvyennoy sobstvyennosti na zyemlyu v SSSR [State Property Right over Land in the USSR]. Moscow: Gosyurizdat.
  2. Arkhipov S. I. 2011. “Problyema triady prava sobstvyennosti” [The Issue of Property Right’s Triad]. Nauchnyy ezhyegodnik Instituta filosofii i prava Ural`skogo otdyeleyniya Rossiyskoy akadyemii nauk, no 11, pp. 448-466.
  3. Gongalo B .M. 2016. Grazhdanskoe pravo: Uchyebnik [Civil Law; A Handbook] in 2 vols. Vol. 1. Edited by B. M. Gongalo. Moscow: Statut.
  4. RF Сivil Сode (Part 1) of 30 November 1994 no 51-FZ (ed. 7 February 2017) no 12-FZ. Ofitsial’nyy Intyernyet-portal pravovoy informatsii, no 0001201702070053.Accessed on 7 February 2017.
  5. Evstignyeyev V. A. 2004. “Sobstvyennost` na zyemlyu v fokusye intyeryesov” [Land Property in the View of Private Interests]. Evstignyeyev// Zurnal rossiyskogo prava, no 8, pp. 75-76.
  6. RF Land Code of 25 October 2001 no 136-FZ (ed. 1 January 2017) no 373-FZ. Ofitsial’nyy Intyernyet-portal pravovoy informatsii, no 0001201607040167. Accessed on 4 July 2016.
  7. RF Constitution of 12 December 1993 (ed. 21 July 2014). Sobraniye zakonodatel`stva RF, 26 January 2009, no 4, art. 445.
  8. Krassov O. I 2014. Pravo sobstvyennosti na zhyemlyu v stranakh Evropy [Property Right over Land in Eropean Countries]. Moscow: Norma, INFRA-M.
  9. Krashyeninnikov E. A. 2007. “K razrabotkye tyeorii prava sobstvyennosti” [To the Development of Property Right Theory]. In: Aktual`nye problyemy prava sobstvyennosti. Matyerialy nauchnykh chtyeniy pamyati prof. S. N. Bratusya. Moscow: Yurisprudyentsiya.
  10. Larin A. Yu. 2011. Tyeoriya gosudarstva i prava [Theory of State and Law]. Moscow: Knizhnyy mir.
  11. Litovkin V. N. 2008. Pravo sobstvyennosti: actual`nye problyemy [Property Right: The Relevant Problems]. Edited by V. N. Litovkin, E. A. Sukhanov, and V. V. Chubarov. Moscow: Statut.
  12. Lomidzye O. G. 1999. “Problyema pyeryekhoda grazhdanskikh prav i obyazannostyey” [The Problem of Transitioning Civil Rights and Responsibilities]. Cand. Sci. (Jur.) diss. abstract. Rostov-on-Don.
  13. Mustakimov N. S., Poprukhina E. A. 2016. “Problyemy ponyatiya i sodyerzhaniya prava sobstvyennosti na zyemlyu” [The Problems of the Notion and the Content of Property Right over Land]. Mariyskiy yuridichyeskiy vyestnik, no 2 (17), pp. 77-80.
  14. Mukhitdinov N. B. 1982. “O sodyerzhanii prava gosudarstvyennoy sobstvyennosti na prirodnye bogatstva” [On the Content of the State Property Right over Natural Resources]. Izvyestiya ANKazSSR. Syeriya obshchyestvyennykh nauk, no 5, p. 67.
  15. RF Supreme Court Presidium of 10 December 2015. “The Judicial Review on the Cases of Confiscating Land Plots for the State and Municipal Needs for the Placement of Transport Objects”. Legal reference system “Garant”. Accessed on 7 March 2018 (unpublished). 
  16. RF Supreme Arbitration Court’s Appellate Decision of 14 March 2014 no VAS-2371/14 on the case no А56-72656/2011. Legal reference system “ConsultantPlus”. Accessed on 7 March 2018 (unpublished).
  17. Orlov S. V., Kislyakova M. A. 2003. “Pravovoye ryegulirovaniye poryadka iz``yatiya imushchyestva dlya gosudarstvyennykh i munitsipal`nykh nuzhd v Rossiyskoy Fedyeratsii” [Legal Regulation of the Order of Confiscating Property for State and Municipal Needs in the Russian Federation]. Yuridichyeskiy mir, no 7, p. 45.
  18. Ushakov D. N. (ed.). 2013. Tolkovyy slovar` sovryemyennogo russkogo yazyka: okolo 100 000 slov [The Explanatory Dictionary of the Russian Language: approximately 100,000 words]. Moscow: Adyelant.