Facts
X. has been the owner since 1968 of plot no. 1 in the land register of the municipality of Y. in Geneva, with an area of 5,447 m2, located in an agricultural zone. This plot is adjacent to plot no. 2, located in a buildable zone, on which a residential building is constructed. Plot no. 1 is laid out as an ornamental park with a swimming pool, ornamental trees, a hedge, and an orchard, and has been used as such for around forty years.
On January 24, 2012, the Agricultural Land Commission of the Canton of Geneva rejected X.'s request to exclude plot no. 1 from the scope of the Federal Act on Rural Land Ownership, on the grounds that this plot was suitable for agriculture. The Federal Supreme Court upheld X.'s appeal and reformed the contested decision, granting X.'s request.
Considerations
The disputed issue is to determine whether plot no. 1 is still suitable for agricultural use within the meaning of Art. 6 para. 1 FARLO. If this is no longer the case, it can be excluded from the scope of the Federal Act on Rural Land Ownership.
According to case law, the non-agricultural use must have lasted for many years, in this case around forty…