Following the sale of development plots in an area of Stavanger in 1993, the seller of a substantial portion of the land retained ownership of a small parcel that had been zoned as parkland. The zoning restriction was maintained in a new zoning plan adopted in 2020, and the municipality subsequently acquired the property by agreement, with compensation determined in accordance with the rules governing compensation in expropriation cases.
The owner claimed compensation based on the so-called park principle. Under this principle, where land within a development area is allocated for roads, open spaces, parks, and other common facilities, such land is compensated on the same basis as developable land, using an averaged area price for the development zone as a whole.
The Supreme Court held that the rationale underlying the park principle—namely, to equalise disparities that might otherwise arise between landowners within a development area—did not apply in the circumstances of this case. The Court emphasised that when a landowner voluntarily sells plots as part of a development project through private transactions, both the total consideration and its allocation among the various parcels are conclusively determined by the agreements entered into by the parties. Consequently, when the remaining land is later acquired, no exception can be made to the general rule that the zoning designation applicable to the specific property must form the basis for its valuation.
The judgment provides guidance on the application of the park principle where land designated for public purposes remains unsold following the voluntary sale of development plots within a larger development area.
Source: Supreme Court
Martin Edelsteen Woll
mwoll@melo.no
+47 414 87 832
