Speaker
Description
The article outlines the opportunities available to the Land Consolidation Court in cases where there is a desire to implement zoning plans, and where the execution of development is imminent.
The legal objectives of rural land consolidation and land readjustment, as its urban counterpart (Viitanen & Vitikainen, 2005), differ between countries. In Norway, land readjustment is a part of the land consolidation legislation and is defined as measures that can change properties, physically or organizationally, to improve their utility for the owners (Elvestad & Sky 2019, p. 65). The definition is wider than in most countries; cf. de Vries et al. (2019, p. 2) and Vitikainen (2004, pp. 25-26). The essence of land readjustment is to facilitate the implementation of public land-use planning for the transformation to new urban land use. As a peculiarity, Norwegian land consolidation (and thus land readjustment) is governed by a special court - the Land Consolidation Court.
One of the benefits of bringing a development project before the Land Consolidation Court is the ability to utilize several tools provided by the Land Consolidation Act within a single case. These include reorganization of property, subdivision of property, and rules for usage regulation. Through these mechanisms, there is potential to achieve a comprehensive redesign of properties within one land consolidation case.
The tools available to the Land Consolidation Court under the Land Consolidation Act facilitate a more functional arrangement of property and rights, offering the potential for significant benefits. Transaction costs often have a substantial impact on the economic feasibility of a project. The tools provided by the Land Consolidation Act can help avoid costs associated with property transformations. For example, a notable advantage is the avoidance of document registration fees during property reorganization in a land consolidation case, provided the value of the property remains unchanged before and after the transformation. This is particularly significant in urban areas, where high land values can result in substantial transaction costs, especially when compared to property reorganization processed through municipal channels instead of the Land Consolidation Court.
Another major advantage of the Land Consolidation Court is its potential to deliver holistic solutions to most property-related challenges. The court can address more than just property boundaries, leveraging the full toolbox provided by Chapters 3, 4, and 5 of the Land Consolidation Act, while also resolving disputes within the same case. Decisions made by the court are legally binding, eliminating potential risks of future disputes over boundaries and rights.
Not all development projects are necessarily suited for proceedings in the Land Consolidation Court, particularly due to various risks associated with court proceedings. Factors such as the complexity of the project, the degree of consensus among stakeholders, property valuation, and the timeline for completion must be considered to assess the suitability of the case for the Land Consolidation Court.
However, if conditions allow for a parallel process involving land consolidation proceedings and development, this can open up opportunities for an integrated, cost-effective, and time-efficient approach to property and rights arrangements in a development area.
References
De Vries, W.T., Wouters, R. & Konttinen, K. (2019). A Comparative Analysis of Senior Expert Experiences with Land Consolidation Projects and Programs in Europe. FIG Peer Review Journal, FIG Working Week 2019, Hanoi, Vietnam April 22-26. 2019.
Elvestad, H.E. & Sky, P.K. (2019). Effects of Land Consolidation in Norway, Nordic Journal of Surveying and Real Estate Research, 14(1), p. 64–78.
Viitanen, K. & Vitikainen, A. (2005). Land Readjustment and Land Cosolidation. In VOSt Action G9 Modelling Real Property Transactions, Working Group 2: Cadastral Science meeting, Aalborg, 25-26.8.2005
Vitikainen, A. (2004). An Overview of Land Consolidation in Europe. Nordic Journal of Surveying and Real Estate Research. Vol. 1, pp. 25-44.
| Keywords | Land readjustment; urban development; Land Consolidation Court |
|---|---|
| Best Congress Paper Award | No |
