Typical Forensic Situations Arising When Considering Land Disputes

The article presents a detailed examination of typical forensic situations requiring various specialized knowledge for their resolution, primarily in the field of land management. The first of them stems from land disputes over the location, configuration and area of land, as well as real estate related to it. The article presents a list of issues to be resolved by a forensic land surveyor who should have specialized knowledge in the fields of land management, cadastre and registration of real estate as well as from related fields. The second situation is due to the conflicts related to the right of shared ownership on land, dwellings and household constructions located at the premises. Forensic research of this type is presented in stages. It is noted that in this situation both specialized land management and engineering knowledge is applied, which allows to define the type and kind of buildings located on the land in question, the degree of their physical wear and tear, the size of premises as well as other technical characteristics which collectively enable an expert to say whether it is possible to actually split the disputed house and grounds, to consider its options and present them graphically. The third forensic situation is aimed at reviewing the question of whether the building under study is an obstacle to the use of the land (unauthorized construction). A judge’s and expert’s purview in resolving such issues is defined. Particular attention is paid to field observations including search, detection, fixation and evaluation of the characteristics of the construction site located on the land plot. The fourth situation involves disputes over the cadastral value of land plots engaging both a forensic expert and an appraiser. It is shown that although both determine the value of the disputed property their activity differs significantly.

forensic land management expertise, land disputes, specialized knowledge, land, forensic expert situation, forensic expert

1. Aver’yanova T.V. Forensic science. General theory course. Moscow: Norma, 2009. 480 p. (In Russ.)

2. Arsen’ev V.D. Issues of the general theory of forensic evidence in the Soviet criminal process. Moscow: Yurid. lit., 1964. 179 p. (In Russ.)

3. Butyrin A.Yu., Stativa E.B. Construction and technical forensics in the arbitration process. Moscow: Yurlitinform, 2019. 195 p. (In Russ.)

4. Mailis N.P. Introduction to forensic science. Textbook. 2nd ed. Moscow: YuNITI: Zakon i pravo, 2011. 159 p. (In Russ.)

5. Keith K.L. Government Land Surveys and Related Problems. Iowa Law Review. 1952. Vol. 38. No. 1. P. 86–115.

6. Puchkova T.M. The essence and classification of tasks in forensics. Theoretical and practical issues of forensic expertise. 1979. Issue 38. P. 52–72. (In Russ.)

7. Sakhnova T.V. Forensic science. Moscow: Gorodets, 1999. 368 p. (In Russ.)

8. Butyrin A.Yu., Krylova M.I., Anokhina D.G. Using Special Knowledge in Construction Engineering Technology in Court to Determine Whether a Disputed Structure Was Built Without a Permit. Theory and Practice of Forensic Science. 2016. No. 2 (42). P. 86–95. (In Russ.)

9. Treushnikov M.K. Judicial evidence. Moscow: Gorodets, 2005. 288 p. (In Russ.)

10. Eisman A.A. Expert opinion (structure and scientific justification). Moscow: Yurid. lit., 1967. 152 p. (In Russ.)

11. Korukhov Yu.G. (ed). Framework of forensic science. Part 1. General theory. Moscow: RFCFS, 1997. 431 p. (In Russ.)

12. Wehrmann B. Land conflicts: A Practical Guide to Dealing With Land Disputes. Eschborn: GTZ, 2008. 122 p.

13. Baranyi S., Weitzner V. Transforming LandRelated Conflict: Policy, Practice and Possibilities. Ottawa: North-South Institute, 2006. 34 p.

14. McEntyre J.G., McNair A.J. Land Surveying and Land Registration. Journal of the Surveying and Mapping Division. 1963. Vol. 89. No. 1. P. 59– 76.

15. Keith K.L. Government Land Surveys and Related Problems. Iowa Law Review. 1952. Vol. 38. No. 1. P. 86–115.

16. Boyd R.P., Uelmen D.L. Re-Surveys and Metes and Bounds Descriptions. Wis. L. Rev. 1953. 657 p.

17. Nie Y., Song Z., Wang K., Diao H., Ren L. The Practice about Some Technical Problems in Current Land Use Database. China Land Science. 2002. No. 2. P. 26–29.

18. Petr P., Horák O., Dostalík P. Divided Ownership – Development and Perspectives. DANUBE: Law, Economics and Social Issues Review. 2018. Vol. 9. No. 2. P. 81–95. https://doi.org/10.2478/danb-2018-0006

19. Walters M., Hastings E. But is Fire the Issue …? The Problems of Managing Multiple Ownership Buildings in Hong Kong. Property Management. 1998. Vol. 16. No. 4. P. 229–235.

20. Butyrin A.Yu., Grabbe T.A., Popova I.I., Khisheva O.I., Kovalenko O.P., Bratskaya I.G., Popov A.N., Shipilova I.A. Determination of technical feasibility and development of options for transforming a residential building as an element of home ownership in accordance with the conditions set by the court. Collection of methodological recommendations on conducting forensic construction and technical examinations / A.Yu. Butyrin (ed). Moscow: RFCFS, 2012. P. 55–96. (In Russ.)

21. Butyrin A.Yu., Grabbe T.A., Khisheva O.I., Kovalenko O.P., Bratskaya I.G., Popov A.N., Shipilova I.A. Determination of technical feasibility and development of options for transforming the land of disputed households in accordance with the conditions set by the court. Collection of methodological recommendations on conducting forensic construction and technical examinations / A.Yu. Butyrin (ed). Moscow: RFCFS, 2012. P. 97–128. (In Russ.)

22. Gerasimenko V.V., Dolin A.N., Shipilova I.A. Solving expert issues related to determining the market value of construction projects and land plots functionally related to them. Methodological recommendations on conducting cost and transformative studies when conducting forensic construction and technical examinations / A.Yu. Butyrin (ed). Moscow: RFCFS, 2016. P. 7–264. (In Russ.)

23. Smirnova S.A. (ed). The basics of valuation in the framework of forensic science: study guide. Vol. 2. Theoretical foundations. Moscow: RFCFS, 2019. 456 p. (In Russ.)

24. Yiu C.Y., Kitipornchai S., Wong J. Review of the status of unauthorized building works in Hong 670 p. http://hdl.handle.net/10397/46266

25. Davison J. Illegal Structures. Multi-Storey Building Management. 1990. Vol. 3. No. 2. P. 43–58.

26. Hoffman T.K. Unauthorized Housing in Greece: A Response to High Costs and Land Scarcity. International Journal on World Peace. 1990. Vol. 7. No. 2. P. 71–74.

27. Yahel H. The Conflict over Land Ownership and Unauthorized Construction in the Negev. Contemporary Review of the Middle East. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1177/2347798919872836

28. Yiu C.Y. Institutional arrangement and unauthorised building works in Hong Kong. Structural Survey. 2005. Vol. 23. No. 1. P. 22–29. https://doi.org/10.1108/02630800510586880

29. Orlov Yu.K. Expert opinion and its assessment (in criminal cases): Textbook. Moscow: Yurist, 1995. 64 p. (In Russ.) 29. Orlov Yu.K. Forensics as a means of proof in criminal proceeding. Scientific Edition. Moscow: RFCFS, 2005. 264 p. (In Russ.)

30. Dunning R., Keskin B. Contesting public valuations of land and development. Town Planning Review. 2019. Vol. 90. No. 4. P. 329–337. https://doi.org/10.3828/tpr.2019.23

31. Kavanagh J., Matz P. Valuing unregistered land. Land Journal. January-February 2019. P. 12– 14. https://www.rics.org/uk/news-insight/publications/land-journal/land-journal-januaryfebruary-2019/

32. Brano G., Herrera-Gomez M., Licheron J. A hedonic urban land price index. Land Use Policy. 2019. No. 81. P. 802–812. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.11.032

33. Ostroumov A.A. Court Challenge of the Results Cadastral Value. Courier of the Kutafin Moscow State Law University (MSAL). 2015. No. 9. P. 102–108. (In Russ.)