Facts
The appellant P. is the tenant of an agricultural property in the municipality of Z. As a tenant, he exercised his statutory right of pre-emption pursuant to the Federal Act on Rural Land Law (RLRA) when the property owner X. sold the property to Y. The Land Registry Office made the corresponding entry. However, upon the request of the Land Registry Inspectorate of the Canton of Graubünden, it decided that P. did not have an agricultural enterprise within the meaning of Art. 47 para. 2 RLRA, as he lacked a sufficient share of owned land, and therefore the requirements for the exercise of the tenant's right of pre-emption were not met. On appeal by P., the Agricultural Commission found that P. had an agricultural enterprise. However, the Administrative Court overturned this decision and found that P. had no statutory right of pre-emption. P. filed an administrative court appeal against this decision with the Federal Supreme Court.Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court decided that while the administrative authorities are competent for determinations in the area of public law, they are not competent for questions of private law such as the existence of a right of pre-emption. Therefore, the decision of the Administrative Court, insofar as it addresses the right of pre-emption, must be overturned. Regarding the question of whether P. is the owner or economically entitled to an agricultural enterprise within the meaning of Art. 47 para. 2 lit. b RLRA, the Federal Supreme Court made the following findings: According to Art. 7 RLRA, only the properties, buildings…