A resident of Lviv was denied land registration due to a typo in her surname. The court has since made a ruling on the matter.

A woman decided to re-register the ownership rights to a land plot. To do this, she contacted the CNAP, but her request was denied due to discrepancies in her surname. This is stated in the decision of the Lviv Railway District Court, published on December 23, 2024.

By decision No. 45 of the executive committee of the Solonkiv Village Council of People's Deputies dated April 11, 1996, a land plot of 0.0408 hectares was transferred to her private ownership according to the plan, and a state act was issued confirming her private ownership of the land. However, an error was made in her surname when issuing the state act. When she applied to the CNAP of the city of Lviv for re-registration of her ownership rights to the land plot, her request was denied because the submitted application contained discrepancies between the claimed and already registered property rights and their encumbrances, specifically regarding discrepancies in the applicant's surname as compared to the submitted documents. When she approached the Solonkiv Village Council to correct the error in the state act, she was advised to go to court. The error in the state act made it impossible for her to fully use and manage the property.

What was the court's decision?

The court granted the woman’s claim. The court decided to establish the fact of her ownership of the state act for private ownership of the land, issued on December 4, 1997, based on decision No. 45 of the executive committee of the Solonkiv Village Council of People's Deputies dated April 11, 1996.

The court concluded that the fact of the woman’s ownership of the state act for private ownership of the land, issued on December 4, 1997, based on decision No. 45 of the executive committee of the Solonkiv Village Council of People's Deputies dated April 11, 1996, was confirmed. The discrepancies in the spelling of the applicant's maiden name in the state act for private ownership of the land were made as a result of an error, and establishing this fact is necessary for the applicant to properly exercise her rights; therefore, this fact should be established," the court emphasized.