Facts
Former spouses X. and Y. are co-owners of an 80'827 m2 plot of land located in an agricultural zone, comprising two parts: one for agricultural use and the other for residential use. This plot of land has been the subject of two enforcement proceedings for mortgage realization against the co-owners. The Office of Enforcement in Geneva sent a request to the Agricultural Land Commission of the Canton of Geneva for a non-subjection of the plot of land for forced sale.
The Agricultural Land Commission ruled on the non-subjection of sub-plot A, and the Cantonal Agriculture Service issued its formal authorization to divide the plot in question. The co-owners appealed against the decision of the Agricultural Land Commission to the Cantonal Administrative Court and against that of the Agriculture Service to the Central Commission for Land Improvement.
The Administrative Court declared inadmissible, due to lack of standing to appeal of the co-owners, the appeal against the decision of the Agricultural Land Commission of February 18, 2000. The co-owners filed an administrative law appeal to the Federal Court, concluding primarily to divide the disputed plot into a plot A of 25'000 m2, not subject to the RLRA, and a plot B of 55'827 m2 remaining subject.
Considerations
The standing to appeal regarding exceptional authorization for prohibition of material division and subdivision does not arise from cantonal law, but from federal law (art. 83 para. 3 RLRA). It is linked to the status of owner, respectively acquirer of the property.
When a mixed-use property is the subject of a forced realization procedure, the enforcement office has the right and even the obligation to request authorization for non-subjection of its non-agricultural part. The office's representative may also appeal against the decision refusing totally or partially the authorization it requested.
The…