Collection of judgments on disputes over boundaries between immovable properties in Vietnam

Lawnet would like to answer your questions as follows:

1. Principles of determining boundaries between immovable properties

In Article 175 of Vietnam's Civil Code 2015, the boundary between adjacent real estates is as follows:

- The boundaries between adjoining immoveable properties shall be determined in accordance with the agreement of the owners or in accordance with a decision of the competent authority.

The boundaries may also be determined in accordance with customary practice or according to boundaries which have existed for thirty (30) or more years without dispute.

The land user may not encroach upon the boundary or change the boundary markers, including boundaries being canals, irrigation ditches, trenches, gutters or boundaries of rice fields. Each entity must respect and maintain the common boundaries.

- A person having land use rights may use the airspace and the sub-surface according to the vertical dimensions of the boundaries around the land as prescribed by law and may not interfere with the use by other persons of the adjoining land.

A land user may only plant trees and performs other activities within the area covered by its land use rights and according to the defined boundaries. If the roots and branches of trees extend beyond the boundaries, such person must clip and prune the parts of the trees beyond the boundaries, except as otherwise agreed.

2. Some judgments on disputes over land boundary

Judgment 93/2020/DS-PT dated May 25, 2020 on the land use right boundary dispute and the claim for damages

+ Level of trial: Appellate.

+ Judicial body: Dong Thap Province People's Court.

+ Quote content: "The land of Mr. S and Mrs. C was left by Mr. S's father, Nguyen Van O, for his use. He declared that he was granted a certificate of land use rights for Plot No. 607, Map Sheet No. 1, with an area of 2,025 m2. Through the actual measurement of 1,506.2 m2, the purpose of use is land T. Issued on November 6, 1995, Mr. S's declaration was granted a certificate without actual measurement, issued according to the map of plot 299. According to Mrs. C, during the use process, the boundary between Mr. S's land and Mrs. H's land has Mr. S's field bank as the boundary, and the land of Mrs. H and Mr. H1 is pond land. The part of Mr. S's land where Melaleuca and dipterocarp are grown is about 4.5 to 5 meters away from the boundary of Mrs. H and Mr. H1's land. Ms. C identified the land boundary between Mr. S and Mrs. H's land as the landmarks M9, M10, M2, A, and M3 shown on the land boundary dispute diagram dated September 10, 2015. Mr. H1 and Mrs. H said that the land boundary between the two sides is the landmarks M8, M4, M11, and M3, not the land boundary as requested by Mrs. C.

Judgment 55/2019/DS-PT dated November 19, 2019 on the land use right boundary dispute

+ Level of trial: Appellate.

+ Judicial body: Vinh Phuc Province People's Court.

+ Quote from the content: "Currently, due to the current land use status of plots 206 and 207 (according to the map made in 1978) of Mr. N and Mr. S's households, there are many changes, so Mr. N, Mr. S, and neither of the local authorities could determine the boundary between plot 206 and plot 207. In fact, during the process of using the land, Mr. N, Mr. S while Mr. E1 was still alive, or Mr. T, Mr. R, and Mr. H while Mr. G2, Mr. T2, and Mr. D1 are still alive and have never been measured in reality, the data on the books are self-declared according to the notes in the index book made in 1974. Therefore, the area on the books and the reality will not match, and moreover, the process of using the status quo has undergone many changes. This explains why, when there is a dispute, the competent authorities will measure the land of the parties, but the results do not match the data.

Judgment 04/2019/DS-ST dated November 29, 2019 on the land use and right boundary dispute

+  Level of trial: First instance.

+ Judicial body: People's Court of District P, Thai Binh province.

+ Quote content: "Since June 2017, Mr. T and Mrs. V believe that the boundary bordering the land plot of Mr. S and Mrs. N has changed because Mr. S and Mrs. N have arbitrarily built the wall." Mr. S built encroachment on Mr. T's land specifically: the road side is 0.3 m wide, and the irrigation side is 1.3 m wide and runs along the 19 m plot of land, so the total encroachment area is 15 m2. Mr. S and Mrs. N did not remember the time to build the wall and said that they did not encroach on the land of Mr. T and Mrs. V. Verification results showed that in June 2017, Mr. S and Mrs. N voluntarily built the wall to cover the next part. bordering the land of Mr. Sang and Mrs. N with the land of Mr. T and Mrs. V. "Through survey and measurement, Mr. S and Mrs. N built a wall 19.11 meters long and encroached on the land of Mr. T and Mrs. V."

Judgment 28/2018/DS-PT dated January 19, 2018 on civil disputes—land use and right boundary

+ Level of trial: Appellate.

+ Judicial body: People's Court of Dong Thap province.

+ Quote content: "In the process of using land, Ms. D's and Mrs. A's household went to register for registration and were granted a certificate of land use rights." The declaration and registration are done in the correct order at the time of issuing the certificate, but there is no actual measurement. The part of Ms. D's land in dispute belongs to plot No. 1, map sheet No. 6, which has an area according to the certificate of 2,011 m2 of garden land; adjacent to Mrs. D's land is the land of Mrs. Vo Thi A's household, with an area granted according to the land use right certificate of 777 m2 in plot No. 3, map sheet No. 1 (land + garden). Based on the on-site appraisal and appraisal minutes and the land plot extraction map, the actual land area that the two parties are using is lacking compared to the area in the land use right certificate. "Because when declaring and registering land use rights, both parties were not physically measured, so there is no basis to determine that the missing area of Mrs. D's household is encroached upon by Mrs. A's party because the land area of Mrs. A is also missing from the area on the certificate."

Best regards!

Please Login to be able to download