Criteria for determining the type of target purpose of lands of the wholesale market of agricultural products

Snizhana Vasilyeva

Postgraduate student of the Educational and Scientific Institute of Law of Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, lawyer of ALARIUS Bar Association, prepared material specifically for the newspaper “Yurydychnyy Bulletin of Ukraine”

In the practice of land relations regarding wholesale markets of agricultural products, one of the most acute problems lies in the correct determination of the code of the type of target purpose and the correctness of the information of the State Land Cadastre, because it is these data that actually form the “legal passport” of the site and affect the assessment of its use as targeted or non-purposeful Fibrous. This article describes which documents and criteria are decisive for the confirmation of an appropriate CCP, how courts approach the assessment of cadastral information, and what evidence and administrative mechanisms can be used to correct errors and minimize risks in disputes with regulatory authorities.

Since the code of the type of intended purpose of land plots (CCPs) is determined on the basis of the materials of the formation of the land plot and the decision of the managing body, which usually contains the wording of a specific “type of use”, it is advisable to take into account the approaches that are guided by the administrative and judicial authorities when assessing whether it is correctly defined” code” of the type of target purpose of land for the infrastructure of wholesale markets of agricultural products (ORSGP).

1) Materials of formation of the site and title documents as the primary “source” of the intended purpose of the land

Courts and authorities, as a rule, check what type of purpose is embedded in:

• decision of the managing body on the grant/removal/transfer of a land plot of state or communal ownership;

• land management documentation (land management project, technical documentation, etc.);

• preliminary extracts from the DZK and other primary documents that existed before/at the time of the formation of the site and the acquisition of property rights.

The resolution of the CAS of the Supreme Court of Ukraine dated 03.04.2025 in case No. 600/5817/21-a is indicative: the Supreme Court noted that during the formation of a land plot, the determination of its type of intended purpose is carried out by the developer of documentation on land management (taking into account the decision of the authorities/local self-government on granting permission for development documentation).

2) Information of the DZK as an official, but refuted “source” of the intended purpose of the land

The CAS in the resolution of 22.02.2024 in case No. 120/5760/21-a stressed that the introduction of information on the intended purpose to the DZ is carried out on the basis of the submitted documentation with land management, and the DZK is the official source of such information. At the same time, in the decision of November 7, 2023 in case No. 400/4165/21, the Court formulated a refuted presumption: the DZK's information is official and is considered reliable unless proven otherwise by the court.

The most typical proper and admissible evidence to refute the DCI information (depending on the subject of the dispute):

1. the opinion of the forensic expert (coordinates of turning points, boundaries, overlays of plots, technical errors in geodata, etc.);

2. land management materials and primary land management documentation (projects/technical documentation, coordinate catalogs, XML exchange files if available, boundary approvals materials);

3. title documents (decisions on granting/transfer, approval of land management, old-style state acts, lease/superfiction/emfitevsis agreements, additional agreements, court decisions);

4. data of topographic and geodetic works and drawing of boundaries in nature (acts, reports of certified engineers, schemes/plans with coordinates, comparative plans of overlay);

5. other official cadstor/cartographic sources and town planning documentation (land inventory, boundaries of settlements/communities, master plans/zoning/DPT).

3) Town planning documentation as a “filter” of the admissibility of determining the intended purpose of land

Practice shows: if two codes “seem to fit”, authorities and courts often prefer the one that does not conflict with the functional area according to urban planning documentation. The CGC of the Supreme Court in the resolution dated April 17, 2025 in case No. 924/25/24, analyzing the change in the purpose of a private plot, proceeded from the fact that the owner relied on an extract from urban planning documentation on functional zones and assessed the “consistency” of a specific type of land purpose with the functional purpose of the territory.

Important: Functional purpose (General Plan/Zoning/DPT) and target assignment (CVCCP) are different legal categories; however, their “coherence” reduces the risks of disputes and claims of regulatory bodies.

4) Administrative correction of errors in DZK

The legislation allows for a free administrative (non-judicial) procedure for correcting errors in the DZK's information on the intended purpose, provided that there is no litigation and the recognition of an error. Correction is carried out by the state cadastral registrar (the body that maintains the DLC).

It is advisable to distinguish:

1. technical error “insertion/display” (description, incorrect transfer, duplication, arithmetic error, etc.), when the correct data is confirmed by documents, but is displayed differently in the DLC;

2. error in the primary documentation with land management, when incorrect information is contained in the documentation itself: first the documentation is corrected, and only then - the DZK information.

Grounds for correcting information in the DZK:

• identified a technical error in the data of the DLC (including in extracts/copies of documents generated from the DLC);

• an error made by the authority during the maintenance of the DLC/state registration of the site;

• an error caused by incorrect data in the land management documentation;

• error in information obtained through information interaction with other registers/systems.

Typical package for initiating a patch:

• application/notification in the form of the Procedure for the maintenance of the DLC;

• document (s) undisputedly confirming the correct information (decision of the manager, proper land management documentation, materials of the State Land Management Documentation Fund or court decision);

• Corrected/updated documentation (if the error was in the original documentation).

5) “Special status” of the ORSGP as an argument in favor of a special code

When the law directly singles out an object/activity (ORSGP as a special subject of agricultural infrastructure), this reinforces the argument that a special (more accurate) code of the type of target purpose should be used, and not a general one. In contrast to the “urban” market (mainly retail), the CSGP is a legal entity with a status related to wholesale “batches” and infrastructure functions (storage, batch preparation, control, access roads, etc.).

The status of the ORSGP does not arise “by the fact” of trade: it is granted by the central executive body implementing the state agrarian policy on a competitive basis. The Procedure for Acquiring the Status of the Legal Entity by a Legal Entity, approved by the Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine No. 141 of February 11, 2010, provides: registration of the decision by the minutes of the Commission of the Ministry of Agrarian Policy, issuance of an order and issuance of a certificate in the established form. In practice, the certificate is an important proof of the intention to obtain land specifically for the infrastructure of the ORSGP and is advisable to attach to the materials of land management as confirmation of the selected code (in particular 01.12).

Conclusion.For a legally correct determination of the code of the CCCTZ of the land of the ORSGP, the key are: (1) the primary materials of the formation of the site and the decision of the manager; (2) the information of the DZK as an official, but refutable source; (3) the consistency with the urban planning documentation; (4) the evidence strategy (expertise, land building materials, title documents) and, if necessary, administrative correction of errors in the DSC. Such an integrated approach ensures the legal certainty of land use, stability of the implementation of the investment project in the agrarian sphere and minimizes the risks of land disputes and claims of regulatory authorities.

‍