The Bucharest Court of Appeal held that it had correctly ordered the partial annulment of a PUG which resulted in the unlawful classification of privately owned land in the “Sports Complexes and Bases” subzone.
Thus, the Court of Appeal found that, by classifying the land in the area of green spaces for recreation, sports complexes and bases, there was an infringement of the right of use.
The Bucharest Court of Appeal held that it had correctly ordered the partial annulment of HCGMB no. 269/2000 which resulted in the unlawful inclusioon of a privately owned land in the subzone “Sports Complexes and Bases”.
Thus, the Court of Appeal found that, by classifying the land as green areas for recreation, sports complexes and sports facilities, there was an infringement of the right of use.
As a result of this classification, the landowner was clearly unable to exercise his right of ownership, expressed in the prerogative to build. In this way, the owner was practically prevented from using the land.
The Court pointed out that the legal possibility for the landowner to benefit from the land was also severely restricted, and that the prohibition to change the use of the land from “green area”, as provided for in the PUG, prevented the landowner from obtaining even natural benefits.
Thus, the Bucharest Court of Appeal concluded that there had been an excessive restriction of the prerogatives conferred by the right of ownership, amounting, in essence, to a de facto expropriation, leading to a violation of the provisions of Article 1 of the First Additional Protocol to the ECHR.
(link)
