Protecting property rights during wartime: is it possible to inherit property located in temporarily occupied territories?

The full-scale armed aggression of the Russian Federation against Ukraine has presented the domestic legal system with a number of challenges that law-enforcement practice had not previously encountered systematically. One such challenge has been the formalization of inheritance rights to property located in temporarily occupied territories. This concerns tens of thousands of real estate properties, including residential buildings, apartments, and land plots, whose owners have died, while their heirs are forced to exercise their rights in the absence of physical access to the property, the loss of title documents, and the objective impossibility of carrying out some legally significant actions. Attorney Anastasiia Tsykalo, head of the administrative law practice at the "LOGIC Law Company," told UNN in a comment how property remaining in the TOTs is inherited. 

The attorney explains that the starting point for any legal analysis of this category of cases is that the fact of a territory’s temporary occupation does not, in itself, terminate a citizen’s ownership rights to property and, accordingly, does not deprive their heirs of the right to inherit. 

"This is consistent both with the constitutional guarantees of the right to private property and with the provisions of the Law of Ukraine "On Ensuring the Rights and Freedoms of Citizens and the Legal Regime in the Temporarily Occupied Territory of Ukraine," which expressly defines the occupied territories as an integral part of the territory of Ukraine. Thus, the legal problem faced in practice lies not in the very existence of the right, but in the difficulty of exercising, confirming, and formalizing it under conditions in which the usual mechanisms for interacting with government authorities and accessing documents have become significantly more complicated," Tsykalo states. 

Do not put off inheritance until later 

According to the attorney, one of the most common problems in cases involving the inheritance of property left in temporarily occupied territories is the passive position of heirs. 

"In practice, situations are often encountered in which people postpone contacting a notary, waiting for the territory to be de-occupied, access to the real estate to be restored, or the possibility of obtaining documents that remain at its location. At the same time, such a position may create additional legal risks," says Anastasiia Tsykalo, head of the administrative law practice at the "LOGIC Law Company." 

The attorney emphasizes that the Civil Code of Ukraine provides a six-month period for accepting an inheritance by submitting the relevant application. Missing this period does not in itself mean the loss of the right to inherit; however, it may subsequently require applying to court and proving the validity of the reasons why the heir was unable to exercise their right in a timely manner.

"When considering such cases, courts assess the specific circumstances of each situation, including the person’s ability to contact a notary, the existence of objective obstacles related to military actions or the occupation of the territory, as well as the heir’s conduct and actions aimed at accepting the inheritance. That is why, in cases of this category, it is important not only to formally comply with the established deadlines, but also to promptly record the person’s intention to accept the inheritance and take the necessary legal measures to protect their rights," the lawyer explains.

According to Tsykalo, in such cases the attorney’s primary task is to timely prevent risks arising for the heir and ensure that an application to accept the inheritance is submitted even in the absence of a complete set of documents for the property. It is important here that Ukrainian legislation provides special mechanisms for formalizing inheritance rights for internally displaced persons and citizens residing in areas of active hostilities or temporarily occupied territories, including the possibility of contacting a notary regardless of the place where the inheritance was opened in cases established by law.

The loss of the original property documents does not mean the loss of ownership rights 

Another significant problem in cases in this category is proving the deceased’s ownership of the real estate in the absence of the original documents, which physically remained in the occupied territory, were lost, or were issued decades ago under procedures that do not correspond to modern registration systems. 

"In such a situation, the absence of the original document is not tantamount to losing the ability to formalize an inheritance. The subject of an attorney’s professional legal work is a systematic search for alternative sources confirming ownership: information from the State Register of Real Rights to Real Estate and archival registers that existed before its introduction; sale and purchase, gift, and exchange agreements; privatization certificates; state acts confirming ownership of land; decisions of local self-government bodies on the allocation or assignment of land plots; technical documentation from the Bureau of Technical Inventory; and other written evidence that indirectly confirms the fact of possessing and disposing of the property," the lawyer lists possible ways to resolve the problem. 

If the evidence is insufficient, go to court 

If the totality of the available evidence is insufficient for the notarization of the inheritance, it becomes necessary to apply to the court to establish the relevant legal fact, in particular, the fact that a title document belongs to the deceased or the fact of the deceased’s ownership, which constitutes an independent category of cases in separate proceedings.

Established case law demonstrates that there is no universal algorithm, the attorney says. 

The scope of legal support, the lawyer explains, depends on a combination of factors: whether documents are available, the circle of heirs and potential disputes between them, the nature of the real estate, and the date on which the inheritance was opened in relation to the beginning of the occupation of the particular territory. In some cases, standard notarial proceedings based on registry information are sufficient; in others, a full-fledged court process is necessary. 

According to Tsykalo, the attorney’s task in this category of cases is a preliminary legal assessment: establishing the fact that the inheritance was accepted in a timely manner, evaluating the sufficiency of the evidentiary basis, determining whether legal facts need to be established through court proceedings, and forecasting the risk of future disputes between the heirs.

"Formalizing an inheritance involving property left in temporarily occupied territories is one of the most challenging areas of modern civil-law practice. The war has created significant obstacles to the exercise of inheritance rights, but it has not terminated citizens’ rights to the property belonging to them. The decisive principle in such cases should be the timeliness of action by the heir and their legal representative: contacting a notary, properly recording acceptance of the inheritance, and collecting and preserving evidence of ownership must be carried out regardless of the actual possibility of accessing the property itself. Protecting ownership rights in wartime consists not only in restoring violated rights, but also in taking measures in advance to prevent possible legal risks," the attorney concludes.