Contents of this page may be automatically translated, we take no responsibility for the accuracy of the translation. Feel free to contact our customer support centre if you have any questions.
More detailed answers to the questions about digital base map.
In-depth answers
More detailed answers to the questions:
- Should not the "property list to base map" include the same area for both property list and base map?
- Can you give examples of known unregistered contractual rights?
- How should we as a municipality handle geometries for contractual rights according to section 3.6.2 to simplify future property investigations for the base map and property list?
- Can there be any legal problems for a municipality to build a GIS layer with areas for contractual easements, it is about civil law agreements between private individuals, GDPR or other legislation?
Should not the "property list to base map" include the same area for both property list and base map?
The property list does not refer to "property list for the base map", but "property list for detailed plan work". Property list and base map according to PBL are two different bases for detailed plan work. They do not have to have a completely identical coverage area.
The property list always includes at least the base map area but can also refer to a larger area to handle the contact area for the detailed plan.
The base map area refers to the area where data on topography and property conditions are checked and updated to b li a basic map for detailed planning work. In other words, the base map is only within the base map area. Any map data outside the base map area refers to so-called map extracts where data has not been checked for base map, see figure 3.2 in HMK - Digital base map.
The handbook describes "property investigation for digital base map" in section 3.6.1 and such is not done outside the base map area. even if the property list covers a larger area.
The work with the property investigation for the property list is not described in the handbook. On the other hand, what is stated in the handbook, according to 3.6 d), is that within the base map area, the base map and the property list should always report the same property conditions regarding occurrence and identity.
To ensure this, the two documents must be coordinated within the base map area. How this coordination is done is up to the municipality because different municipalities have different routines for producing the two different documents for detailed planning work.
Without coordination, there is a risk that the documents show different information about the property conditions within the base map area and that duplication work is performed.
Can you give examples of known unregistered contractual rights?
Yes. Some examples are:
- Rights granted in the event of separation
- Contract rights granted in connection with the transaction
- Agreement on wiring
- Possession-protected leases
Rights granted by separation
Easement granted by a separation is not an official right. It is a contractual right. This is despite the fact that it can often be reported on the separation map in the file in the administrative archive. Often it has not been requested to be registered. This means that it is not reported in the property register (FR), neither in the general part, nor in the registration part.
Despite this, one can often, e.g. when it is reported on the map in the file and refers to something physically permanent and obviously observable in the terrain, such as an exit road, assume that its presence is discovered during the property investigation that is done.
This also means that in such a cases, despite the lack of the substantive protection that a registration provides, can be assumed to remain valid against new owners of encumbered property, even though it may have changed owners several times.
A concrete example can be seen in the files 03 -AVS-2417 p. 1 and 5 and 03-88: 413 p. 5-6.
The easements that were added during separations before 1876 even have the same substantive protection as if they were registered. One reason for this is that it was not until 1876 that there was any possibility of protecting one's easement by enrollment. A tip is therefore to pay special attention if there are properties in the area that were formed by secession before 1876.
Contract rights granted in connection with service
Contract rights may have been granted in connection with, ( but not within), ordinance and be included in the ordinance even after the era of seclusion. The lease has often been made with the participation of the administrative surveyor and is therefore included as an appendix in the administrative act.
It may even be the case that the existence of, or even the area of exercise for, the right is reported on the administrative map. The reason why the lease was made as a contractual right, and not one as an official right, is often that there was a legal obstacle to making it as the latter.
For some reason, it is often the case that the rights have not been registered. What has been stated above under 1) on the discovery of the right in a property investigation as well as a property law portfolio should therefore apply to the highest degree to these as well. A concrete example can be found in file 04-YTT-429 p. 1 and 12.
Agreement on pipelines
Permission to place pipelines in or under a public place, public road or railway has often done through special agreements, instead of by leasing e.g. management right. The legal figure that has arisen through the agreement should, in this context, almost be regarded as an unregistered contractual right. of the lines arouse (mis) thoughts in the base map performer about the existence of such an agreement as a basis for the placement. Copies of these agreements can also be included as appendices in administrative documents regarding management rights or the like.
As a kind of explanation for why interruptions have been made in a management rights section. An experienced and trained eye can anticipate the existence of such agreements by studying management rights on the register map.
Possessed leases
Possessed leases have rarely been entered in FR's registration part, and are of course not official rights. Nevertheless, the existence of such is often generally known and of great importance for planning of a certain type.
An example is the housing lease for a collection of holiday homes on so-called unfree grounds. When planning such an area, which may be the result of a desire to subdivide and sell plots of land to resp. house / homeowner, the existence of the leases is of course known to the municipality or the initiator of the planning.
It is also important that the agreements are presented and examined in the planning work so that the rights can be considered and managed according to the best conditions. . This also applies to the description of consequences that must take place in accordance with the law.
Another example is the existence of an agricultural lease on a land area that has been purchased as a raw land area for planning. Agricultural areas are often leased. For a field or pasture area that is used when planning begins, it should be assumed as a basic hypothesis that there is a lease.
For planning of land areas owned by the municipality or another initiator of the planning, such as a developer, is Of course, the presence of leases on the land known. If the raw land acquisition has been carried out through a property regulation, the existence of the lease, or even of the lease agreement itself, can be presented in that deed of administration. Often because they have been the subject of a decision to continue to exist in the procedure. This means that you can assume that they will continue to be valid during their period of validity, even though such changes have taken place.
How should we as a municipality handle geometries for contractual rights? according to section 3.6.2 to simplify future property investigations for the base map and property list?
It is appropriate to save and reuse geometries for contractual rights for future work with property investigations.
Note, however, that the locally saved information should only be seen as a basis for future property investigations that need to be checked and updated. This is because the information may contain shortcomings in the form that contractual rights may have been written off or added.
How information is handled in detail is up to the municipality, as different municipalities have different routines and systems.
Here you can find an example of how Eskilstuna municipality, which is not a KLM municipality, handles contractual rights. The example is written by Eskilstuna municipality.
We have created three different GIS layers, one for point, one for line and one for surfaces, for contract rights in our GIS database.
When we make an investigation for a base map, we go through what information is available about the current properties in the property register, then we check about some of the current the contractual rights already exist in our folders and/or digitized as geoobjects. If we do not have the files, we order them, save the file in a folder with the same name as the agreement has in the general part of the property register and then we digitize the objects and store them in the GIS database.
In the same way, we check if there are objects digitized in the area before, but are not in the property register, then we have to handle these in an appropriate way.
The background to Eskilstuna’s way of working
Lantmäteriet in Eskilstuna started early (approx. 2008) with both saving the file from Riksarkivet (the Swedish National Archives) and digitizing the geometries from the map appendices.
The file was saved in a separate folder, to reduce duplication of work if colleagues in the same corridor ordered copies of the same file from Riksarkivet.
The file was saved with the same name as the file has in the general part of the real property register. We digitized the geometries based on the map appendices and checked them into the Land Survey
Can there be any legal problems for a municipality to build up a GIS layer with areas for contractual easements, it's about civil law agreements between private individuals, GDPR or other legislation?
HMK-Digital base map does not constitute a constitution but only a handbook with recommendations. Neither Lantmäteriet nor the National Board of Housing, Building and Planning have issued any regulations on standards for the design of basic maps.
It is the municipality itself, as the person responsible for personal data for processing, must make the legal the assessments necessary under the GDPR, including assessment of legal (legal) basis under Article 6 (1) GDPR. Lantmäteriet can not make these assessments for the municipality.
Lantmäteriet 's lawyer believes that the writing in HMK is not primarily aimed at collecting agreements concerning unregistered contractual easements from the contracting parties.
Article 6.1 (a) GDPR. It constitutes a legal basis for the processing if the data subject has given his consent to his personal data being processed for the purpose in question. Consent must be voluntary.
NOTE! Note, however, that consent according to the GDPR can be revoked at any time.
If it is only a question of unregistered contractual easements already known by the municipality, the information is already with the municipality. The municipality can then process this already collected personal data as long as it is not incompatible with the original purposes for which the personal data was once collected.
The legal basis can then be "information of public interest" according to Article 6.1 e) GDPR in combination with the municipality as an integrity-enhancing measure should also "obtain the consent of the parties to the agreement".
Regulation regarding the collection of unregistered contractual easements can be found in the following statutes
Planning and Building Act
- Chapter 5. § 8
- Authorizations ch. 16 § 1 a
Planning and Building Ordinance
Planning documents
- Chapter 2 Section 5 a, Ordinance (2019: 207), Chapter 2 Section 5 b, Ordinance (2019: 207), Chapter 2 Section 6, Ordinance (2018: 1872)
Authorizations
- Chapter 10 Section 29, Ordinance (2019: 207)
- Chapter 10 § 30, Ordinance (2019: 207)