Problems of notarial verification of compliance with the requirements on the maximum size of landholding in the certification of alienation agreements for agricultural land plots

Abstract

This article examines the legal and technical issues arising when a notary verifies compliance with maximum landholding requirements when certifying agricultural land alienation agreements in Ukraine, and formulates proposals for improving the relevant legal regulation. The study employs general scientific and specialised legal methods: logical-legal analysis — to clarify the content of regulatory provisions; a systematic approach — to identify internal contradictions in legal regulation; the comparative legal method — to compare the requirements of various subordinate legislative acts; and legal modelling — to substantiate proposals for improving legislation. The normative basis consists of the Land Code of Ukraine, the Civil Code of Ukraine, the Law of Ukraine “On Notaries”, Cabinet of Ministers Resolution No. 637 of 16 June 2021, and other legislative acts. The empirical basis includes the official letter of the Notarial Chamber of Ukraine No. 38/17 of 25 June 2021 and the explanatory position of the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine regarding the treatment of land plots held under fiduciary ownership. Four systemic problems in notarial verification have been identified. First, the absence of a unified integrated land and rights accounting system: the State Land Cadastre and the State Register of Real Property Rights operate as separate databases, without a consolidated real-time query by acquirer available to the notary. Second, a technical discrepancy in the precision of area data across registries — four decimal places in the Cadastre versus two in the Register — which renders automatic verification impossible and creates a risk of discrepancies in totals when summed manually. Third, the inadequacy of the procedural algorithm in Resolution No. 637, which does not specify the priority of registry data in case of discrepancy, nor the procedure for accounting for shares in co-ownership or in the statutory capital of legal entities. Fourth, legal uncertainty as to the scope of the notary’s liability for a violation that could not objectively have been detected on the basis of available registry data. The article also addresses fiduciary ownership of agricultural land plots: the position of the Ministry of Justice that such ownership must be included in the calculation of the acquirer’s total landholding is legally justified, yet no technical mechanism exists for implementing this requirement through the State Land Cadastre and the State Register of Real Property Rights. Addressing the identified regulatory and technical gaps requires: creating a unified analytical platform integrating the State Land Cadastre and the State Register of Real Property Rights with a consolidated query function by personal identification number; supplementing Resolution No. 637 with a step-by-step verification algorithm that establishes priority rules for data sources in case of discrepancy; legislative exemption of notaries from liability for acting in good faith within the limits of available registry data; establishing the nullity of alienation agreements concluded in breach of the maximum landholding requirement; and statutory regulation of the mechanism for verifying the area of land plots held under fiduciary ownership by a creditor.