It depends on the stage construction had reached on the wedding date. If the building already existed as a separate object of property rights, it belongs to the person who was building it, and joint investments are accounted for in the settlement of marital community property (BSM). If only the foundations were in place, the house came into existence during the marriage and generally forms part of BSM. Registration in the cadastre does not resolve this dispute, although, according to ÚGKK, the cadastre examines whom to register where the documents conflict.
The building permit was issued to the husband-to-be, the wedding took place during construction, and approval for use was granted, when you were already married. The title sheet may name one or both of you, depending on the wording of the approval documents and the municipality’s notice assigning a building registration number. While the marriage continues, spouses often pay little attention to this difference in registration. On divorce or inheritance, it can become a disputed issue.
What matters is when the building became a separate object of property rights
Marital community property (BSM) includes property acquired by either spouse during the marriage, subject to statutory exceptions such as gifts or inheritance (Section 143 of the Civil Code). A person building a house acquires ownership when the building comes into existence as a separate object of property rights. The deciding factor is therefore not the date of the building permit or approval for use, but the stage of construction on the wedding date.
In its judgment 8Cdo/5/2023 of 26 November 2024, the Supreme Court of the Slovak Republic held, in a dispute over the sale of land on which construction had begun, that foundations alone, without an above-ground structure, form part of the land and do not constitute a building under construction. For above-ground buildings, lower courts in BSM disputes have proceeded on the basis that a building comes into existence when at least the layout of its first above-ground storey is clearly apparent. This approach was taken, for example, by the Regional Court in Žilina (6Co/80/2021) and the Regional Court in Trnava (28Co/23/2023). Appeals on points of law against these decisions were unsuccessful. The Supreme Court of the Slovak Republic rejected the appeal on points of law in 9Cdo/3/2023 and dismissed the appeal in 8Cdo/189/2024, but did not substantively assess the test itself.
What this means for spouses
If, under this approach, the house came into existence before the wedding, it belongs to the person who built it, even if the spouses completed it together. If it came into existence during the marriage, it generally forms part of BSM, even if the building permit named only one spouse. In both cases, financial contributions are accounted for in the settlement of BSM.
The following quotation is reproduced in its original language:
Každý z manželov je oprávnený požadovať, aby sa mu uhradilo, čo zo svojho vynaložil na spoločný majetok, a je povinný nahradiť, čo sa zo spoločného majetku vynaložilo na jeho ostatný majetok.
A spouse who invested savings from before the wedding in a house forming part of BSM may therefore seek reimbursement in the settlement. Conversely, if joint funds were used to complete a house belonging to only one spouse, that spouse must, upon settlement, reimburse the amount spent on the house from the joint property. Ownership of the land is assessed separately. Buildings do not form part of the land (Section 120(2)), so a house may form part of BSM even if the land beneath it remains in the sole ownership of one spouse.
Whom the cadastre will register
For a building with a building registration number, the person named in the municipality’s notice assigning that number is registered as the owner, unless another document establishes a different owner (Section 46(2) of the Cadastral Act). In Cadastral Bulletin 1/2024, ÚGKK addressed a case in which the notice assigning the building registration number named both spouses, while the decision approving use named only one because the building permit had been issued before the wedding. According to ÚGKK, the cadastral department must examine such a discrepancy. It permits registration as BSM on the basis of a marriage certificate and a solemn declaration by both spouses that they acquired the house during the marriage and that the scope of BSM had not been restricted in relation to it. If one spouse does not sign the declaration, the court will decide. If only the notice assigning the building registration number and naming both spouses were submitted, ÚGKK states that the cadastre would register the house as their BSM without further examination.
Why registration does not resolve the dispute
Registration by record in the cadastre serves a record-keeping function and does not create ownership (Section 5(2)). In the case that ended with judgment 8Cdo/189/2024, both spouses had been registered as owners under BSM on the basis of a building registration number assigned in both their names. After the divorce, both the District Court and the Regional Court held that the house was the husband’s sole property because its exterior had already been completed before the wedding.
If you want to establish whether the house is jointly owned, retain documents evidencing the state of construction on the wedding date, such as the construction log, invoices and photographs. In applications to the building authority and the municipality, ensure that the developer and owner identified in the documents reflect the actual position.
How we can help
During construction, we ensure that permits, approval for use and the application for a building registration number reflect who the developer and owner are. We do this as part of our permitting coordination service. If the house is already built and the registration needs to be corrected, we will assess the supporting documents as part of our property legal due diligence service. If the spouses cannot agree, we can handle proceedings for a declaration of ownership.
This answer provides general information on the law as at 3 October 2026. It does not constitute legal services or replace an assessment of an individual case. The details of your situation may differ. Book a consultation to discuss them.
