Recognition of Property Right to Land in Georgia – Preconditions, Evidence and Legal Issues

I. About This Article

Recognition of property right to land is one of the most practical and problematic issues in Georgian real estate law. In Georgia, it is common for a person to possess and use a land plot for many years as a residential area, auxiliary space, yard, garden or land connected with a non-residential building, while the relevant property right to land is still not registered in the Public Registry.

In such cases, factual possession alone is not sufficient. It is necessary to assess what type of land is involved, when the possession started, whether a building or structure exists on the land, whether the land is adjacent to a land plot already owned or lawfully possessed by the interested person, whether the territory falls within a zone where recognition of property right to land is legally excluded, and what evidence can confirm the claim.

Recognition of property right to land is especially important where a person intends to register property, sell it, transfer it by inheritance, attract an investor or develop real estate. Unregistered or legally unclear land always creates risk – both for the person who uses the land and for a potential buyer.

This article discusses the conditions required for recognition of property right to land, what evidence should be submitted by the interested person and what practical conclusions follow from recent decisions of the Supreme Court of Georgia.

The article also explains the difference between land under lawful possession or use and arbitrarily occupied land, the role of orthophotos, witness statements and expert opinions, the circumstances in which the competent commission may refuse recognition, the importance of zoning restrictions and how administrative and court disputes may arise in this process.

II. What Does Recognition of Property Right to Land Mean?

Recognition of property right to land means the transfer of a land plot owned by the state into the property of an individual or a private-law legal entity, in accordance with the conditions and procedure established by law.

The law distinguishes between two main situations:

• land under lawful possession or use;
• arbitrarily occupied land.

Lawful possession refers to cases where a person acquired a right over the land plot on a certain legal basis, but the property right to land was not fully registered. Arbitrarily occupied land, on the other hand, means land that a person occupied before the relevant law entered into force and with respect to which additional statutory preconditions must be confirmed.

This distinction has significant practical importance. Depending on the type of land and possession, the competent authority, required documentation, evidentiary standard and grounds for refusal may differ.

For this reason, recognition of property right to land should not be treated as a purely technical registration procedure. It is a legal process that often requires combined analysis of documents, factual circumstances, urban planning data and court practice.

In practice, many unsuccessful applications are connected not with the absence of any factual connection to the land, but with the applicant’s failure to properly prove the legal preconditions required by law.

III. When Can Property Right to Land be Recognised Over Arbitrarily Occupied Land?

In relation to arbitrarily occupied land, the law establishes several important preconditions. As a general rule, the land must be agricultural or non-agricultural land owned by the state, which was occupied by the interested person before the law entered into force.

However, occupation of the land alone is not enough. One of the important statutory grounds must also exist. In particular, the land may be considered for recognition if a residential house or non-residential building is located on it, if the land is adjacent to a land plot owned or lawfully possessed by the interested person, if the requested area does not exceed the statutory limit, if the land has not already been disposed of by the state, and if there is no circumstance excluding recognition of property right to land.

The practice of the Supreme Court of Georgia also emphasizes that recognition of property right to land is possible only where the case materials reliably confirm possession or use of the land, the existence of a building or structure, or the legal basis of adjacency.

At the same time, the existence of a building or structure is assessed not only according to the current situation, but also with reference to the period in which the law requires the relevant fact to have existed.

In practice, disputes often concern questions such as whether a building existed on the specific land before the legally relevant date, whether it belonged to the applicant or the applicant’s predecessor, whether the land was actually occupied, and whether the cadastral survey drawing corresponds to the factual possession.

This is why the legal analysis should begin before the application is submitted. If the applicant relies on a building, the evidence should show not only that the building exists today, but also that it existed during the relevant period. If the applicant relies on adjacency, the legal status and boundaries of the neighbouring registered property should be checked carefully.

IV. What Evidence Is Required?

Recognition of property right to land depends on evidence. The interested person must submit documents and information confirming possession, use, arbitrary occupation or the legal basis of lawful possession.

As a rule, to substantiate a claim concerning arbitrarily occupied land, the applicant may need a document confirming arbitrary occupation of the land or witness testimony, a cadastral survey drawing of the land plot, information necessary for determining the fee for recognition of property right to land, identification documents of the interested person and, where necessary, additional evidence.

In practice, such evidence may include orthophotos, aerial photographs, utility subscriber documents, payment receipts, technical inventory archive materials, notarised statements of neighbours, expert opinions, photographic materials, old plans, acceptance-handover acts or other documents.

However, one point is particularly important: evidence must be assessed as a whole. A single document is not always sufficient. For example, witness testimony may be important, but if it is contradicted by objective technical evidence, such as an orthophoto or public archive data, the court will pay particular attention to the correlation between different pieces of evidence.

Therefore, recognition of property right to land requires not only collecting documents, but also properly organising their legal significance. In practice, the process often becomes complicated exactly at the stage where the applicant has factual possession, but the supporting evidence is incomplete, inconsistent or not properly linked to the statutory preconditions.

A well-prepared application should not simply state that the land has been used for many years. It should show when the use started, what the nature of the use was, what physical signs existed on the land, what documents confirm this, and why the land falls within the category that may be subject to recognition.

V. Orthophoto, Witness Testimony and Expert Opinion

In real estate disputes, orthophotos have particular importance. An orthophoto may help determine whether a building, fence, auxiliary structure or another factual sign existed on the land plot during a specific period.

The practice of the Supreme Court of Georgia has repeatedly emphasized that an orthophoto often represents objective evidence of factual circumstances existing during a particular period. However, this does not mean that other evidence automatically loses importance.

If the quality of the orthophoto does not allow precise identification, or if other evidence supplements its content, witness statements, expert opinions and other documents may be assessed together with the orthophoto.

For example, in one case, importance was attached to the fact that a certain outline could be seen on an orthophoto, although full identification was difficult. In those circumstances, the court also assessed witness statements and a letter from the Public Registry. In another case, the administrative authority based its refusal only on an old land-use plan, while the case contained letters from the urban development authority and an expert opinion indicating a different factual picture.

This shows that recognition of property right to land may be successful where the interested person does not limit the application to a formal statement, but prepares a complete evidentiary package in advance.

An expert opinion may be especially important where the dispute concerns the existence of a building, the period of its construction, the boundaries of factual possession, the overlap between cadastral data and actual use, or the functional characteristics of the land. At the same time, an expert opinion should be consistent with other documents and should answer the specific factual questions that are legally relevant for recognition of property right to land.

VI. When May the Commission Refuse Recognition?

The competent commission may refuse to satisfy the application if the application or the documents attached to it do not confirm the statutory preconditions.

Grounds for refusal may include failure to prove possession or use, failure to prove that a building or structure existed before the legally relevant period, absence of state ownership over the land plot, conflict with third-party rights, unclear cadastral data, a land category that is not subject to recognition, or incompatibility with urban planning or functional zoning requirements.

It is especially important that certain categories of land are directly excluded by law from recognition of property right to land. Such categories may include land intended for public use, roads, streets, sidewalks, squares, parks, sanitary and protective zones, pastures and other categories.

This means that recognition of property right to land may be impossible even where a person actually occupied or used the land for a certain period. If the land falls within a category that is not subject to recognition, this may become an independent ground for refusing the application.

Therefore, before filing an application, the interested person should not rely only on factual use. The legal category, ownership status, functional zone and public-use restrictions of the land should also be checked.

In many cases, the key issue is not whether the applicant has ever used the land, but whether the law allows property right to land to be recognised over that specific land plot at all.

VII. Pasture, Recreational Zone and Protective Zone

The practice of the Supreme Court of Georgia shows that the category and functional zone of the land are often decisive.

In one case, the dispute concerned whether the requested land plot belonged to the pasture category. The commission refused recognition on the ground that, according to an old land-use plan, the land was indicated as pasture. However, the court paid attention to the fact that the case contained contrary evidence, including letters confirming residential zone status.

The court considered that formal reference to an old plan alone was not sufficient. The administrative authority had to examine the factual situation, functional zone and other evidence. This approach is important because it shows that the commission should not rely mechanically on one document if other evidence in the case indicates a different legal or factual situation.

In another case, the disputed land was located within the protective zone of a historic area. In that context, the court explained that despite the possible existence of other preconditions, location within a protective zone excluded recognition of property right to land.

In a further case, Recreational Zone 1 applied to the requested land plot. The court indicated that such circumstance may also become a ground for refusing recognition of property right to land.

The practical conclusion from these decisions is clear: recognition of property right to land should begin not only with collecting evidence of possession, but also with checking the zone, purpose and legal restrictions applicable to the territory.

This is particularly important for land located in urban areas, around historic districts, near roads or infrastructure, in recreational spaces, near public-use territories or in areas where urban planning restrictions are frequently applied.

VIII. Obligation of the Administrative Authority to Examine the Case Fully

In cases concerning recognition of property right to land, the administrative authority has an obligation to make a decision based on full examination and correlation of the circumstances that are essential for the case.

The commission should not make a decision based only on a formal reference. If the case contains contradictory evidence, the administrative authority should explain which evidence it gives priority to and why.

If the ground for refusal is a functional zone, protective zone, pasture category or urban planning incompatibility, the decision should contain specific factual and legal reasoning.

In the practice of the Supreme Court of Georgia, there are cases where the court upheld the conclusion of a lower instance court annulling an administrative act because the commission had not fully examined the factual condition of the land, the applicable functional zone and the evidence submitted by the applicant.

In such cases, the court usually does not finally decide the issue of recognition of property right to land itself. Instead, it annuls the administrative act and orders the authority to conduct new administrative proceedings.

This distinction is important. Annulment of the administrative act does not automatically mean that recognition of property right to land will necessarily be granted. After renewed proceedings, the administrative authority may again refuse recognition, but such refusal must be based on full examination and proper reasoning.

If the land plot is disputed or its boundaries are unclear, recognition of property right to land requires combined analysis of cadastral and legal data. The applicant should be ready to present the evidence in a structured way so that the commission can assess not only individual documents, but the entire factual and legal picture.

IX. What Should the Interested Person Check Before Filing an Application?

In practice, the biggest mistake is submitting an application without prior legal review. An interested person often assumes that if neighbours confirm possession or if a building exists on site, this will be sufficient. In reality, the process is more complex.

Before filing the application, the following issues should be checked:

• whether the land is state-owned;
• whether the land has already been disposed of to a third party;
• whether the land is adjacent to a land plot under lawful possession or ownership;
• whether a building existed before the legally required period;
• whether the existence of the building or structure is confirmed by an orthophoto or other evidence;
• whether a recreational, transport, historic, sanitary or other protective zone applies to the land;
• whether the land is a road, sidewalk, square or public-use territory;
• whether the cadastral survey drawing is prepared correctly;
• whether there is a cadastral overlap;
• whether additional expert opinion or archive materials can be obtained.

Without this review, recognition of property right to land may turn into a long administrative and court dispute. That is why involvement of a Real Estate Lawyer is advisable not after receiving a refusal, but before starting the process.

Recognition of property right to land should begin with prior legal review of the land status, zoning and documentation.

For more information about legal assistance in real estate matters, see our page: Real Estate Lawyer.

X. What Happens in Case of Refusal?

If the commission refuses to satisfy the application, the interested person may challenge the relevant individual administrative-legal act. In such disputes, it is important to assess not only whether the final result is correct, but also how the administrative proceedings were conducted.

In court, the following issues may become relevant:

• whether the commission examined all essential circumstances;
• whether it properly assessed the evidence;
• whether there was a real legal basis for refusal;
• whether the administrative authority relied only on a formal circumstance;
• whether the authority respected proportionality between public and private interests;
• whether the administrative act was reasoned.

In practice, it often happens that the court annuls the administrative act without resolving the disputed substantive issue and instructs the commission to issue a new act. Such a result is important because it gives the applicant an opportunity to present stronger evidence in the renewed proceedings and request full assessment of the case.

However, it should be remembered that where there is a direct statutory prohibition – for example, if the land is located in a protective zone or represents public-use territory – a formal defect in the administrative act alone may not be sufficient for final success.

Therefore, recognition of property right to land at the appeal stage also requires detailed analysis of both substantive law and administrative procedure.

The legal strategy should answer two questions at the same time: first, whether the commission committed a procedural or reasoning error; and second, whether the applicant can actually satisfy the material preconditions for recognition of property right to land.

XI. Connection with Real Estate Purchase and Due Diligence

At first glance, recognition of property right to land may appear to be a problem only for the person who has possessed land for years and is trying to register it. However, this issue is also very important for buyers.

If a buyer is purchasing real estate where part of the land is unregistered, where the yard is factually larger than the area indicated in the Public Registry, or where adjacent land is “in use” but not owned, special caution is required.

In such cases, the following should be checked:

• the area registered in the Public Registry and the area actually used;
• cadastral boundaries;
• legal status of adjacent land;
• whether property right to land may be recognised;
• whether zoning or infrastructure restrictions exist;
• whether the territory is a road, sidewalk, square or another public-use object;
• whether the land is located in a protective or historic zone.

If these issues are not checked in advance, the buyer may purchase property expecting to register the adjacent land later, but later discover that such registration is legally impossible.

For this reason, within real estate due diligence, recognition of property right to land should be considered as one of the important legal risks.

For more information about property registration issues, see our page: Property Registration.

In real estate transactions, unregistered land should never be treated as a minor technical issue. It may directly affect the value of the property, its development potential, access, use, future sale and financing. If the buyer needs the land for construction, investment or commercial operation, the inability to recognise property right to land may substantially change the commercial logic of the transaction.

XII. Practical Conclusions from the Practice of the Supreme Court of Georgia

Several important practical conclusions follow from the decisions of the Supreme Court of Georgia.

First, factual possession of land must be confirmed by specific evidence. A general statement that a person used the land for many years is not sufficient unless supported by an orthophoto, archive data, utility document, witness testimony, expert opinion or other relevant evidence.

Second, the existence of a building or structure has decisive importance where the claim is based on the existence of a building on arbitrarily occupied land. Where necessary, an expert opinion may be required to confirm the existence of the building before the relevant period.

Third, functional zoning and legal restrictions must be checked. Land may be factually used by a private person, but still not be subject to recognition of property right under the law.

Fourth, the commission’s decision must be reasoned. The administrative authority must show which facts it relied on, what evidence it assessed and why it reached a specific conclusion.

Fifth, annulment of an administrative act does not always mean final victory. If the court orders the commission to reconsider the case, the applicant should use that stage to strengthen evidence and improve the legal position.

Accordingly, recognition of property right to land is a process where success depends not only on the factual situation, but also on how correctly the legal position is prepared.

The applicant should be ready to show the complete chain of facts: when possession began, how the land was used, whether the use was visible and continuous, what documents confirm that use, whether statutory exclusions apply, and why recognition of property right is legally permissible.

XIII. How TB Legal Can Help

Our Law Firm offers legal support in matters related to recognition of property right to land, Property Registration and disputes connected with the Public Registry.

Our assistance may include:

• checking the legal status of the land plot;
• analysing Public Registry data;
• assessing cadastral survey drawings and overlap risks;
• checking functional zones and urban planning restrictions;
• determining documents required for recognition of property right;
• preparing the application to be submitted to the commission;
• preparing an administrative complaint or court claim;
• representation in court;
• conducting due diligence before acquisition of real estate.

Recognition of property right to land often requires knowledge of administrative law, real estate registration rules and court practice. For this reason, such matters should not be limited to merely collecting technical documentation.

A proper legal assessment helps determine whether the case has a realistic chance of success, what evidence should be strengthened, what risks may arise from zoning or public-use restrictions, and whether a refusal can be challenged effectively.

TB Legal assists clients not only after a refusal has already been issued, but also at the planning stage – before filing the application, before purchasing property with unclear land boundaries, or before making an investment decision involving unregistered land.

XIV. Conclusion

Recognition of property right to land may be an important opportunity for persons who have possessed or used a land plot for many years but do not have the relevant right registered in the Public Registry. However, this process is not automatic.

The interested person must prove the statutory preconditions, properly prepare evidence, check the legal status of the land, functional zone, possible restrictions and present a reasoned position before the administrative authority.

The practice of the Supreme Court of Georgia shows that a formal approach is often insufficient. In some cases, the commission’s refusal may be annulled due to incomplete examination of the case. In other cases, however, the land category or protective zone may ultimately exclude recognition of property right to land.

Therefore, before starting the procedure or purchasing property where registration issues exist, it is advisable to conduct a prior legal assessment. A properly prepared strategy significantly increases the chances of success and reduces the risk of a long dispute.

Recognition of property right to land should be viewed as a legal process, not as a simple administrative formality. The best result is usually achieved where factual possession, technical documentation, cadastral data, zoning information and legal arguments are prepared together before the dispute begins.

XV. Sources Used

1. Law of Georgia on Recognition of Property Right to Land Plots Possessed or Used by Individuals and Private-Law Legal Entities.
2. Supreme Court of Georgia, case No. BS-468(K-26).
3. Supreme Court of Georgia, case No. BS-987(K-23).
4. Supreme Court of Georgia, case No. BS-374(K-26).
5. Supreme Court of Georgia, case No. BS-260(K-26).
6. Supreme Court of Georgia, case No. BS-229(K-26).

Disclaimer

This article has been prepared for general informational purposes only and does not constitute individual legal advice. Assessment of a specific case requires detailed analysis of the relevant documents, factual circumstances and applicable legal regulations.

Issues related to recognition of property right to land, land status, factual possession, cadastral boundaries, zoning restrictions, administrative proceedings and court disputes may be assessed differently depending on the specific facts of the case. Before filing an application, challenging a refusal or purchasing property with unclear land registration, it is recommended to obtain individual legal advice from a qualified lawyer.