The digest of case law on unauthorized constructions maintains the previous trend against demolishing buildings erected without proper authorization unless exceptional circumstances such as the danger to public health and safety can be demonstrated. The digest further lays down a legal test for when a building cannot be considered an unauthorized construction and which buildings can be protected from demolition. The Supreme Court once again stressed that the demolition of an unauthorized construction is a measure of last resort. The digest also addressed procedural issues, such as parties that have standing to demand that unauthorized constructions shall be demolished, and elaborated on the limitation period to file these lawsuits.

The digest of case law emphasizes that the mere fact that town-planning and construction regulations were breached when a structure was erected does not mean that it should be demolished where it is established that the structure does not endanger the public health and does not violate the rights and interests of third parties.

If the court finds that the respondent can plausibly cure the breaches of construction law to prevent the demolition of a building, the court’s judgment should specify two alternative ways of compliance, namely the demolition of unauthorized construction or bringing it into compliance with the regulatory requirements. The respondent may then choose between these two alternatives to execute the judgment.

The Supreme Court also clarified that a building is not to be treated as an unauthorized construction merely because it is not used in accordance with the intended purpose of the land plot on which it is located. A building may only be demolished if the land plot’s authorized use does not in principle allow the construction of similar types of objects, provided that the breach cannot be cured by bringing the building to compliance with the applicable land use and construction regulations.

The Supreme Court again reiterated that the mere absence of a construction permit does not by itself mean that courts should dismiss the developer’s claim to quiet title and declare that the developer is the owner of the resultant building. This rule is applicable unless there are other obstacles to keeping the building.

The Supreme Court also clarified which parties have standing to sue in cases of unauthorized construction. The Supreme Court emphasized that only parties that have a real interest in the demolition of a building are entitled to sue. In case of private claims, this real interest may be based on a specific right the claimant has. If the claimant is a public authority, it has standing to sue only to the extent of its established legal competence and where the suit is justified by reference to the need to protect the interests of third parties and public health. In line with this position, the Supreme Court reversed the decisions of the lower courts to demolish a medical facility built without a construction permit at the request of the local administration. The Supreme Court stated that the courts failed to properly consider whether the administration had an interest in the demolition of a socially significant facility – a children’s clinic.

The Supreme Court also considered procedural aspects of disputes related to unauthorized construction. Among other points, the Supreme Court stated that the parties may not settle these cases without the court’s examination whether town-planning and construction regulations were observed during the construction. This is because an unauthorized construction may only be maintained without demolition if it does not cause threat to the life and health of the public. This requirement also comes into play when it comes to the limitation period within which claims to demolish an unauthorized construction may be filed. The general three-year limitation period applies to such claims only if the unauthorized construction does not endanger the life and health of the public. Otherwise, the limitation period does not apply (see Digest of case law on cases related to unauthorized construction, approved by the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated 16 November 2022).