Summary
On June 30, 2025, the Court of First Instance of Rhodes delivered a decisive judgment in favor of a Greek-South African family, affirming their lawful ownership of a contested plot of land on Kastellorizo Island. The property traces its legal origin to a 1930 dowry agreement by which the family’s great-grandfather endowed the land to his daughter upon marriage. Despite the family home having been destroyed during World War II bombings, the family retained an enduring connection to the site.
The dispute arose when the defendants sold a 21.20-square-meter portion of the land without the family’s knowledge or consent. The defendants asserted ownership based on extraordinary usucapion (adverse possession), claiming uninterrupted, peaceful occupation since 1995. The court thoroughly examined the evidence and rejected the defendants’ claims, reaffirming the family’s ownership and ordering their eviction, alongside an award of legal costs.
Background and Context
In August 2023, as COVID-19 restrictions eased, the family returned to Kastellorizo to visit and inspect their ancestral land. They were shocked to discover significant excavation works had been carried out without their authorisation. The excavation exposed the original stone foundations of the family home destroyed during World War II.
Under Greek law, any excavation on private land—especially in areas of historical or archaeological significance—requires prior approval from the local Archaeological Authority. This authority typically grants permits exclusively to the lawful property owner, ensuring that cultural heritage is preserved and protected from unauthorised or potentially damaging works. In the present case, the family neither applied for nor consented to any excavation on their ancestral plot.
Shortly after discovering the unauthorised excavation, the family was approached by the second defendant, a neighboring landowner. He asserted that the family had lost legal ownership of the disputed land following a prior court ruling, a claim that was entirely unknown to the family. The defendant further stated that he had lawfully acquired part of the property and had commissioned the excavation himself with the intent to build a courtyard on the site. Given the family’s lack of awareness of any such judicial proceedings and the absence of any documentation supporting the defendant’s assertions, they firmly disputed these claims and began to investigate the true legal status of the land.
Investigation and Discovery
Acting on legal advice, the family promptly engaged professionals to conduct a comprehensive topographical survey of the plot following the unauthorised excavation. This survey confirmed the existence of the original family home’s foundations, reinforcing their historical and legal ties to the land.
Simultaneously, the family initiated formal inquiries with the Archaeological Authority and the Land Registry. The Archaeological Authority clarified that while the defendants had sought a permit for land clearing and archaeological testing, no authorisation for permanent construction had been granted. Despite a stop-work order issued by the authority and enforced by local police, the defendants completed a courtyard with fencing and furnishings, demonstrating active, unauthorised use. The family also uncovered that the defendants had registered a portion of the plot (21.20 square meters) under the second defendant’s name via a 2019 internal sale from the first defendant. This internal transfer suggested an intent to consolidate land holdings rather than innocent possession.
Judicial Proceedings
The family initiated legal action in February 2024, seeking formal recognition of ownership, eviction of the defendants, restoration of the property, and compensation for legal costs. The family presented extensive documentary evidence—comprising the original 1930 dowry agreement, subsequent inheritance documents, building permits, tax receipts, photographic proof, and witness testimonies—substantiating their continuous legal ownership.
The defendants relied on extraordinary usucapion, arguing that the first defendant had possessed the land peacefully since 1995, justifying the 2019 sale to the second defendant. The court examined these assertions carefully, noting that permanent residence by the first defendant on the property commenced only in 2006, insufficient to satisfy the statutory 15-year period required for usucapion under Greek law.
Moreover, the court found that the family’s documented ownership—demonstrated through continuous tax payments, the issuance of a building permit for the plot, and the careful preservation of legal documents over the years—effectively interrupted any claim of adverse possession, despite the family living abroad.
Judgment and Legal Significance
The Court of First Instance invalidated the defendants’ purported acquisition through adverse possession and declared the 2019 transaction void. The court upheld the family’s title, ordered eviction of the defendants, and awarded legal costs to the plaintiffs. The defendants were granted a window to lodge an appeal, however, chose not to.
This ruling stands as a critical precedent in Greek property law, especially regarding extraordinary usucapion claims involving ancestral lands. It underlines the importance of documented ownership and continuous legal ties, even when owners reside abroad, over claims based on limited or non-exclusive occupation.
Conclusion
This case underscores the resilience of well-documented hereditary property rights within Greek law and the judiciary’s commitment to uphold such rights against unlawful occupation and claims of adverse possession.
For families and legal practitioners, the decision exemplifies the importance of maintaining thorough records, legal vigilance, and proactive enforcement actions when confronting unauthorised land use. The case’s outcome promotes the preservation of historic family properties and serves as a reminder that legal title, supported by clear evidence, remains paramount.
In a broader sense, this judgment contributes to safeguarding Greece’s rich cultural heritage by ensuring that property disputes involving historic lands are resolved through transparent legal processes, thereby protecting ancestral legacies for future generations.