The presence of forest plantations on a land plot serves as a basis for verifying the good faith of the acquirer
Cannot be considered good faith behavior of a person, acquiring a land plot consisting predominantly of perennial forest vegetation, without verifying that such a plot does not belong to the state forest fund.
Prosecutor on behalf of the Russian Federation through an authorized body submitted a request to a citizen to recognize the absence of property rights on land plot in part due to the intersection of its boundaries with the boundaries of the federal forest fund land.
The court has adopted a decision to satisfy the submitted claim. It is recognized that the citizen's right of ownership on land plot is absent in part of territory, whose boundaries intersect with the boundaries of forest fund land. Information from EGRN regarding the area and coordinates of characteristic points of the land plot has been excluded, while simultaneously entering into EGRN information about its revised area and changed coordinates of characteristic points
dots.
Resolving the dispute, court, relying on the provisions of Articles 1, 7, 8, 68 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, Articles 8, 17, 27 of the Land Code of the Russian Federation, Article 28 of the Federal Law dated December 21, 2001 No. 178-FZ "On Privatization of State and Municipal Property", taking into account the evidence presented, including expert opinion, came to the conclusion that the privatization of the forest plot was carried out by the original owner unlawfully, without the consent of the Russian Federation in its capacity as...
authorized bodies and in violation of the procedure provided for by legislation, which resulted in subsequent illegal transactions by transfer of this plot. The disputed land plot belonged and currently belongs to forest fund lands, is federal property, is not subject to privatization under the law, while reclassification of the plot from one
The transfer of categories of land to another was performed by an unauthorized body.
Rejecting the respondent's argument that the information specified in the EGRN takes precedence over data reflected in the GLR, and therefore the land plot belonging to the respondent cannot be located on forest fund lands, the courts based their decision on the fact that in this case the issue is not about the priority of EGRN information over GLR data, but rather about the priority of certain EGRN entries over others, since in relation to the disputed territory in the EGRN there are
information on double cadastral registration and state registration of rights on part of a land plot with intersecting territorial boundaries.
At the same time, neither the respondent, nor previous acquirers can be considered bona fide purchasers of the disputed land plot, since they actually acquired forest fund lands under a purchase and sale agreement as agricultural land. The case materials confirm that the [land plot](/enc/3419/ "Definition
The concept of «Land Plot» in the legal encyclopedia was never used for agricultural purposes, is covered with forest vegetation, which could not fail to raise doubts in the respondent regarding the legality of its acquisition and further disposal.
Source: Thematic Review of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation No. 11/2026. On the consideration by courts of cases related to rights to land plots of certain categories of land excluded from circulation and restricted in circulation, and on the use of such plots