On the protection of the rights and interests of the owners of real property destroyed as a result of hostilities (simplified procedure for acquiring ownership of land plots)

At present, many owners of property destroyed as a result of hostilities face two major problems (within the urban planning sphere): the absence of documentation (ownership rights) for land plots and the impossibility of obtaining a building passport for the construction of a new object in place of the one that was destroyed, in cases where urban planning documentation is lacking.

📌 The draft law aims to resolve the first issue on Amendments to certain legislative acts of Ukraine concerning the protection of land rights of the owners of real property destroyed as a result of hostilities (registration No. 13174 dated April 15, 2025). The purpose of the draft law is to protect the rights and interests of the owners of real property destroyed as a result of hostilities.

The draft law proposes, in particular:

  • ⭕️ To allow the gratuitous transfer of land plots into private ownership to the former owners (or their heirs) of real property (buildings, structures) located on such land plots and destroyed as a result of hostilities, terrorist acts, or sabotage caused by the armed aggression of the Russian Federation against Ukraine, where ownership was terminated in accordance with the data of the State Register of Real Property Rights due to the destruction of the property;
  • ⭕️ To establish that the transfer of land plots of state or communal ownership for use by citizens of Ukraine, who are former owners of buildings and structures destroyed as a result of hostilities and located on such land plots, or their heirs, is carried out without land auctions;
  • To enshrine in the Land Code of Ukraine the priority of international treaties, ratified by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, over national regulatory acts in the field of land relations;
  • To allow the change of designated purpose of land plots of state or communal ownership under existing buildings of diplomatic missions without adhering to the functional zoning of land within the category of residential and public buildings;
  • To provide the possibility of exemption from land rent for diplomatic missions if this is provided for by international treaties ratified by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine;
  • To grant the Ministry of Environmental Protection the authority to approve the methodology for determining the amount of damage caused by pollution and littering of land resources due to violations of environmental legislation.

On July 9, 2025, the members of the Committee on agrarian and land policy recommended that the Verkhovna Rada adopt the draft law in the second reading and in full.

Necessity of the Proposed Legislation

Under the Law of Ukraine “On compensation for damage and destruction of certain categories of real property as a result of hostilities, terrorist acts, or sabotage caused by the armed aggression of the russian federation against Ukraine”, compensation is paid to the owners of destroyed property. This law also establishes the State register of property damaged and destroyed as a result of hostilities, terrorist acts, or sabotage caused by the armed aggression of the russian federation against Ukraine. Paragraph 20 of Article 8 of the Law states that “the ownership right of the recipient of compensation for the destroyed real property is terminated due to its destruction. State registration of the termination of such a right is carried out in accordance with the law”.

At the same time, there are cases where the ownership or use rights to the land plot where the destroyed building or structure was located are not registered in the name of the compensation recipient.

Paragraph 2 of Part 2 of Article 134 of the Land Code of Ukraine provides that the transfer of land plots of state or communal ownership, on which a real property object (building, structure) owned by individuals or legal entities is located, is carried out without land auctions.

Subparagraph 5 of Paragraph 27, Section X “Transitional Provisions” of the Land Code of Ukraine establishes that during martial law, the gratuitous transfer of state or communal land plots into private ownership is prohibited, except in cases where such land plots are transferred free of charge to the owners of real property (buildings, structures) located on them.

Therefore, in cases where the ownership of a destroyed building or structure located on a land plot of state or communal ownership (not transferred for use to the owner of the destroyed real property) is terminated by state registration, the person cannot actually obtain this land plot for lease or ownership.

Additionally, due to the termination of ownership rights to the destroyed real property, the person loses the right to acquire the land plot without complying with the requirements of paragraph 1, part 3 of Article 20 of the Land Code of Ukraine. As a result, the transfer of ownership or use of the land plot to the owner of the destroyed object must be preceded by the development or amendment of urban planning documentation.

In my opinion, resolving these problems is truly important, and I hope that the aforementioned draft law will be adopted.

📐 Distances between buildings, setbacks from adjacent property boundaries, red lines, and fire separation distances (2025)

📌 At the same time, the second problem remains unresolved — the impossibility of obtaining a building passport in cases where urban planning documentation is absent.

This issue arises in many localities across Ukraine, and unfortunately, local urban planning and architecture authorities are practically powerless in this matter. The only option they can suggest to owners of land plots where real property destroyed due to hostilities was previously located is to apply for a Development intention scheme for the land plot.

In many cases, this may help resolve the issue, but unlike the building passport, the Development intention scheme is not free of charge, since it is prepared by an architect or certified design engineer under a service agreement and is usually a paid service.

Chief architects of settlements lacking urban planning documentation understand that a residential or garden house once stood on that land plot and was destroyed as a result of hostilities, and that the person intends to rebuild it. Therefore, such individuals apply for a building passport, but under current legislation, the architectural authorities must deny the request if urban planning documentation is absent.

⭕️ Additionally, even when urban planning documentation is developed and approved, there are frequent cases where the land plot size does not meet the minimum standards set by the current building regulations, or where it is physically impossible to place a new house due to non-compliance with fire safety distances, etc.

Ukraine is at war, and to address the consequences arising directly from the war, there is a need to further regulate the issuance of building passports in cases where private houses were destroyed due to hostilities.

In my view, and the view of some representatives of urban planning and architecture authorities, it is necessary to regulate the issuance of building passports for land plots where real property objects destroyed due to hostilities were previously located, even in the absence of urban planning documentation. For example, provided that the placement of the new object complies with current building regulations, or in cases where this is not possible, a reasonable condition could be the placement of the planned house within the foundation footprint of the destroyed house.

I hope that this issue will also be resolved at the legislative level.

The draft law and the problems described above are open for discussion in the Urban Planning in Ukraine group.

Yuriy Brykaylo, attorney

DREAMDIM & URBANDATA

Ⓒ 2025

Land plots are covered by the concept of “facility” (within the meaning of the Law of Ukraine “On the legal regime of martial law”) and may be used for defense purposes during the implementation of martial law measures

The Supreme Court, acting as a panel of judges of the Cassation Administrative Court, in its Ruling dated June 27, 2025, in case No. 560/8712/22 regarding the recognition as unlawful and cancellation of the order of the Khmelnytskyi District Military Administration “On the use of facilities and labor resources of enterprises, institutions, and organizations located in the territory of Khmelnytskyi district of Khmelnytskyi region for defense needs”, reached the following conclusions:

…Regarding the appellant’s arguments that the Central Military Construction Directorate in Khmelnytskyi (KEV m. Khmelnytskyi) was deprived of the right to use military property, namely defense lands, the courts of previous instances established that the contested orders do not concern the deprivation of KEV m. Khmelnytskyi of the right to use the land plot. The term of use of the facilities of the land plot for the sowing and harvesting of agricultural crops was set for one year (Clause 2 of the Order dated May 12, 2022 No. 30/3218/22).

According to Article 1 of the Law of Ukraine “On the transfer, compulsory expropriation or seizure of property under the legal regime of martial law or state of emergency”:

  • compulsory expropriation of property means the deprivation of the owner of the right of ownership of individually defined property that is privately or communally owned and which is transferred to state ownership for use under the legal regime of martial law or state of emergency, subject to prior or subsequent full compensation of its value;
  • seizure of property means the deprivation of state enterprises or state economic associations of the right of economic management or operational control of individually defined state property for its transfer for the needs of the state under the legal regime of martial law or state of emergency.

The plaintiff is not the owner of the disputed land plots, since the relevant land plots are held under the right of permanent use pursuant to State Acts on the Permanent Use of Land, and therefore the procedure of seizure under this Law is not applicable.

⭕️ Thus, in this case, there was no seizure of land plots from the rightful land user or transfer of the right of use to another person, but rather exclusive temporary use of the facilities (land plots) for ensuring defense needs as a goal of the martial law measures.

Furthermore, the courts of previous instances established that the land plot since 2021 (excluding the period of the dispute) was not cultivated, and LLC “Multi-Agrar Dnipro” withdrew its claim in case No. 924/985/21, which the plaintiff referred to, and the proceedings in the case were terminated.

Regarding the arguments about the inconsistency of the concept “land plots” with the concept “facilities”, the Court proceeds from the fact that according to paragraph 3 of part one of Article 8 of Law No. 389-VIII, in Ukraine or in certain localities where martial law has been introduced, military command together with military administrations (if established) may independently or with the involvement of executive authorities, the Council of Ministers of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, and local self-government bodies, implement and carry out, within the temporary restriction of constitutional rights and freedoms of persons and citizens, as well as the rights and legitimate interests of legal entities provided by the Decree of the President of Ukraine on the introduction of martial law, such measures of the legal regime of martial law: to use the facilities and labor resources of enterprises, institutions, and organizations of all forms of ownership for defense needs, to change the mode of their operation, to implement other changes in production activities, as well as working conditions in accordance with labor legislation.

Ukrainian legislation does not specify exactly which facilities of enterprises, institutions, and organizations may be used.

According to paragraph 26 of part two of Article 15 of Law No. 389-VIII, military administrations of settlements in the relevant territory exercise powers regarding the regulation of land relations (except for decisions on alienation of land plots from communal ownership and granting of such land plots for lease for a term of more than one year).

✅ Dismantling or Demolition? Which decision may be made by a local council, and which – by a court?

According to paragraph 69 of part one of Article 1 of the Law of Ukraine “On the basic principles and requirements for food safety and quality”, facilities are buildings or a complex of buildings, premises, structures, equipment, and other means, including vehicles, as well as territory used in the production and/or circulation of objects of sanitary measures.

In the Register of Facilities maintained by the State Service of Ukraine on Food Safety and Consumer Protection, land plots are indicated as a type of facility.

⭕️ The Court agrees with the conclusion of the appellate court that land plots are covered by the concept of “facility” within the meaning of the Law “On the Legal Regime of Martial Law” No. 389-VIII and may be used for defense needs during the implementation of martial law measures.

⭕️ In addition, legislation does not contain any restrictions on decisions regarding the use of land plots as facilities in relation to land plots that are defense lands.

You may discuss the referenced Supreme Court ruling in the Urban Planning in Ukraine group.

Yuriy Brykaylo, attorney

DREAMDIM & URBANDATA

Ⓒ 2025

The transfer of the roof of an agricultural-purpose building under a loan for use agreement for the installation of solar panels does not deprive the owner of the real estate tax benefit

The Supreme Court, acting as a panel of judges of the Cassation Administrative Court, in its Ruling dated February 5, 2025, in case No. 500/6132/23 concerning the recognition as unlawful and annulment of tax notices-decisions on the payment of real estate tax by the owner of agricultural buildings, part of the roofs of which were lent for the installation of solar panels to another person, reached the following conclusions:

…According to paragraph 30.1 of Article 30 of the Tax Code of Ukraine, a tax benefit is the exemption of a taxpayer from the obligation to calculate and pay tax or duty as provided by tax and customs legislation, or payment of such tax or duty in a reduced amount, provided the conditions defined in paragraph 30.2 of this Article are met.

Subparagraph “zh” of subparagraph 266.2.2 of paragraph 266.2 of Article 266 of the Tax Code of Ukraine provides that buildings and structures of agricultural producers (legal entities and individuals), classified as “Buildings for agriculture, forestry and fishery” (code 1271) according to the State Classifier of Buildings and Structures DK 018-2000, and not leased, lent, or transferred under financial leasing by their owners, are not subject to taxation.

Thus, a structure (building) is not subject to real estate tax (other than land) if the following cumulative conditions are met:

  • such non-residential building is classified under “Buildings for agriculture, forestry and fishery” (code 1271) of the State Classifier of Buildings and Structures DK 018-2000;
  • the owner of such building (legal entity or individual) is an agricultural producer;
  • such non-residential building is not leased, lent, or transferred under financial leasing by its owner.

This legal interpretation is consistent with the legal position of the Supreme Court expressed, in particular, in the ruling dated May 21, 2024, in case No. 600/5153/23-a.

Evidence of overlapping land plots includes documents prepared by a cadastral registrar or expert conclusions

⭕️ Regarding the transfer by the claimant to an individual entrepreneur (the user under the loan-for-use agreement) of part of the greenhouse roof, with an area of 2,944.5 sq.m, for free use (commodatum), including for the placement of solar panels, it should be noted that under the wording of subparagraph “zh” of subparagraph 266.2.2 of paragraph 266.2 of Article 266 of the Tax Code of Ukraine, the objects not subject to taxation are specifically buildings and structures of agricultural producers (legal entities and individuals), classified under “Buildings for agriculture, forestry and fishery” (code 1271) of the State Classifier of Buildings and Structures DK 018-2000, which are not leased, lent, or transferred under financial leasing by their owners.

In other words, when granting a real estate tax exemption, the legislator established as a condition the non-transfer of the building in its entirety under lease, lending, or financial leasing.

In the disputed case, the courts established, and the controlling authority did not contest, that the individual entrepreneur (owner) directly uses the greenhouses in their business (as an agricultural producer growing flowers), and thus qualifies for the tax benefit. At the same time, solar panels were installed on the roofs of some greenhouses by another individual entrepreneur (the user under the loan-for-use agreement), who received those roofs for free use.

⭕️ The subject of the loan agreement concluded between the claimant and the individual entrepreneur (the user under the loan-for-use agreement) is not the buildings and/or structures themselves (the greenhouses), but only the roofs of such buildings (structures). Therefore, taking into account the conditions for granting the benefit defined in subparagraph “zh” of subparagraph 266.2.2 of paragraph 266.2 of Article 266 of the Tax Code of Ukraine (the benefit applies specifically to a building not transferred under lease), the courts correctly concluded that the existing loan agreement does not provide grounds for assessing the real estate tax (other than land) on the individual entrepreneur (owner of the property), which is payable by individuals who own non-residential real estate, for the area of premises whose roofs were lent for use.

Discussion of court practice regarding real estate and land law is available in the group Urban Planning in Ukraine.

Yuriy Brykaylo, attorney

DREAMDIM & URBANDATA

Ⓒ 2025