Facts
In the context of an inheritance partition, daughter T., whose husband is a farmer, requested the attribution at the yield value of all the real estate of her father M.'s estate, on the grounds that these properties constituted an agricultural enterprise. The Rural Land Commission rejected this request, considering that the properties did not form an agricultural enterprise within the meaning of the Federal Act on Rural Land Law (RLRA). The Administrative Court then declared T.'s conclusions aimed at establishing the existence of an agricultural enterprise and her right to attribution at the yield value as inadmissible, considering that only the judge responsible for the partition was competent to decide on these issues.Considerations
The Federal Tribunal admits the administrative appeal filed by D., M.'s granddaughter. It considers that the concretization of the general notions defined in Arts. 6 to 9 RLRA, such as the agricultural enterprise, falls under public law and the competence of the administrative authority. Although the civil judge seized of a dispute on the application of the private law provisions of the RLRA may concretize these general notions on a prejudicial basis, it is preferable that he suspend the civil proceedings when a party has brought a request for a finding (Art. 84 RLRA) relating to a general notion relevant…