recent translations summaries


2023. December 5.

Decision 24/2023. (XII. 5.) AB on establishing a constitutional requirement

Decision number: IV/314/2023
Subject of the case:

Constitutional complaint against the judgement No. Kfv.III.37.563/2022/6 of the Curia (land trade Act; inheritance; acquisition capacity)

The Constitutional Court held that it is a constitutional requirement under Article XIII (1) of the Fundamental Law that, pursuant to section 34 (3) of the Act CXXII of 2013 on the Turnover of Agricultural and Forestry Land (Land Trade Act), in the case of acquisition of ownership of land by way of a testamentary disposition, the heir’s capacity to contract must exist during the probate proceedings. The Constitutional Court furthermore declared that the challenged judgements of the Curia and of the Szeged Regional Court were in conflict with the Fundamental Law and annulled them. In the case underlying the proceedings, the testator, who died in December 2020, named the petitioner as heir in his valid will. The petitioner learned of his inheritance of agricultural land at the probate hearing in July 2021. The petitioner has been a registered primary farmer since 2013, registered with the National Chamber of Agriculture in 2016 and entered in the farmers’ register since 20 July 2021. After the probate hearing, the notary public contacted the competent regional government office to issue an official certificate certifying the conditions for the acquisition of the real property. The government office refused to issue the official certificate, arguing that the petitioner was not a farmer at the time of the opening of the inheritance and therefore could not inherit the ownership of the land. The petitioner brought an action against the decision of the Government Office and requested the annulment of the decision. According to the petitioner, section 34 (3) of the Land Trade Act on the capacity to contract cannot be interpreted as meaning that registration as a farmer should be deemed to have taken place at the time of the opening of the inheritance. The petitioner argues that such an interpretation would seriously restrict the right to inherit. The Szeged Regional Court dismissed the petitioner’s action on the ground that Hungarian succession law follows the ipso iure law of succession, according to which the testator’s property passes to the heir at the moment of the testator’s death. Following the petitioner’s request for review, the Curia upheld the final judgement. According to the principle of the decision, in the case of the acquisition of ownership of land by means of a testamentary disposition, the statutory acquisition restrictions must be examined at the time of the testator’s death. The petitioner’s position is that the Land Trade Act does not contain a condition to this effect, and the judgements rendered during the proceedings violate his right to property. In its decision, the Constitutional Court explained that in the case at hand, it could be established that the heir did not have the capacity to acquire the property at the time of the death of the testator, but had the capacity to acquire it before the decision of the agricultural authority was taken. One of the objectives of the Land Trade Act is to ensure that agricultural land is owned by those who cultivate it. The legal conclusion of the contested decisions excluded from inheriting the land a petitioner who, in the course of the proceedings, was shown to have fulfilled the conditions laid down by the Land Trade Act as the implementation of the national strategic objective set out in Article P of the Fundamental Law. The Constitutional Court found that the interpretation of the law by the courts in the proceedings disproportionately restricted both the right to active inheritance and the right to passive inheritance, and was therefore contrary to the Fundamental Law. Therefore, the Constitutional Court declared the judgements of the Curia and the Szeged Regional Court to be contrary to the Fundamental Law and annulled them. Furthermore, the Constitutional Court attached a constitutional requirement to section 34 (3) of the Land Trade Act, according to which, in the case of acquisition of ownership of land by means of a testamentary disposition, the heir’s capacity to acquire the property must exist during the probate proceedings.