Building amnesty: three routes for legalising old and unauthorised buildings

Slovakia is estimated to have hundreds of thousands of buildings lacking a permit, occupancy approval or both, with no land register entry. Amendment No. 46/2024 Z. z. inserted provisions in the former Building Act No. 50/1976 Zb. addressing them through three age-based regimes, rather than one blanket amnesty. All share one caveat: legalised does not mean registered.

Before October 1976: unconditional amnesty

Unofficial English translation:

Buildings constructed before 1 October 1976 are deemed, from 1 April 2024, to have been built in accordance with applicable legislation.

— § 142l(3) of Act No. 50/1976 Zb.

The oldest buildings are lawful directly by statute, without application, proceedings or examination. The building authority conducts no proceedings; if removal proceedings are pending, it stops them once the age is established.

1976–1989: two conditions

Buildings constructed from 1 October 1976 to 31 December 1989 are deemed lawful under the second sentence of § 142l(3) if continuously used for their purpose and the building owner owned the land or held another right to it on 1 April 2024, such as a lease, easement or statutory right. No application is needed, but the conditions require proof when registering the building.

1990–March 2025: application required

The third regime is not automatic. For a building constructed and used without or contrary to permission between 1 January 1990 and 31 March 2025, the authority may examine and confirm fitness for use on the owner’s application. The decision has the effect of occupancy approval (§ 140d, as amended by Act No. 26/2025 Z. z.). The owner must prove, among other matters, satisfactory technical condition, rights to the land, planning compliance and any necessary consent for protection or safety zones. Failure leads to a removal order, so an application should not be made blindly.

Unofficial English translation:

The building owner may apply for examination of fitness for use under paragraphs 1 and 2 by 31 March 2029.

— § 140d(3) of Act No. 50/1976 Zb.

Amendment No. 26/2025 Z. z. relaxed the regime further: an application is possible during retrospective permitting proceedings. For completed buildings, those proceedings stop once the application is filed (§ 88a(11)). Fitness examination is therefore generally a more accessible route for completed unauthorised buildings.

Legalisation does not mean land registration

All three regimes address public law legality, not records. Registration still requires an application supported by documents under § 46 of Act No. 162/1995 Z. z. For pre-October 1976 buildings, a municipal notice of occupancy approval or bringing into use; for 1976–1989 buildings, a municipal notice identifying construction date, purpose, building number and builder, plus proof of the builder’s land right on 1 April 2024 (§ 46(10)); and for newer buildings, a fitness-for-use decision. A survey plan is also needed if the building is absent from the cadastral map. See registering an old building without occupancy approval and legalising a 1990s building.

Practical implications

• Amnesty cannot be brushed aside in a sale. Buyers and banks want the building on the ownership record. Determine before signing whether the seller can register it and at what cost.
• Developers are affected too. An old barn or extension on purchased land raises who will legalise or remove it, and by when. Address this in due diligence and the sale agreement.
• The application must be filed by 31 March 2029. Under § 84(7) of Act No. 25/2025 Z. z., this deadline applies both to applications for examination of a building’s fitness for use and to applications for retrospective permission under the transitional regime. Once it expires, the legislation as currently enacted does not allow owners to rely on retrospective permission as an alternative route. Owners of unauthorised buildings should therefore not delay preparing their applications.

We identify the applicable regime through property legal due diligence. Permitting support handles applications, evidence and authorities, while legal support for construction companies covers the wider work.