Własność złóż kopalin a kryterium społeczno-gospodarczego przeznaczenia gruntu w prawie polskim

The regulation of the ownership of mineral deposits by the legislator in Art. 10 of the Geological and Mining Law Act does not clearly indicate when a mineral deposit may be taken over the ownership of the land. The answer is to be found in Art. 143 of the Civil Code and the general clause contained in it, the criterion of socio-economic purpose of the land property. It determines the boundaries of the land property and the scope of permitted interference by the owner into the land. At the same time, this clause is ambiguous and not defined by law. This solution, although it raises some controversy, leaves some flexibility in its application in practice, although it means that the burden of interpreting the above-mentioned general clause has been shifted to the legal doctrine and case law of the courts. On the other hand, its definition allows for the identification of a mineral deposit that may be owned by the owner of the latter. The analysis of the available literature and jurisprudence allows for the emergence of certain trendsin this matter. The theses remain valid: the recognition of opencast mining as constituent parts of real estate and the opposite thesis that this interpretation cannot be applied automatically and indiscriminately. Above all, the thesis of the Supreme Court stands out against the background of the others, which indicates the designations of the criterion of the socio-economic use of land. It gives a full answer, indicating that the delimitation of the real estate boundaries taking into account the above-mentioned criterion should be made each time for a specific real estate, taking into account its location, destination in the localplan orthestudy and the way in which the owner intends to use it in accordance with the law (judgment V CSK 200/14).