With wildfires spreading in Greece this year, lawmakers have taken measures for property owners to clear their lots. It is important to know how the process should be carried out and what penalties can be imposed on the owner if they do not comply with the law. It should also be noted that the deadline for submitting declarations has been extended until July 15, 2024, which is completely different from the deadline for clearing the lots that expires much earlier, as stipulated by law.

1.Which areas must be cleared according to the law?

The new law stipulates that property owners must compulsorily clear certain plots of land in order to comply with the fire prevention period. More specifically, the areas subject to the law include lots both within and outside the urban plan. Areas where the forest map has not yet been applied are not exempt from the law, nor are those for which there is no provision for application; thus, the lots in the aforementioned areas must be cleared.

Furthermore, according to the law, owners must also clear the areas located within a 100-meter radius from their property, meaning from all sides peripherally and not just vertically/horizontally. However, for property owners to be burdened with this obligation, they must have received prior notification from the local forestry service. The same applies to any buildings located on lands that have not been included in either the urban plan or any forest map of their area.

It is important to know that the obligation to clear the lot does not rest solely with the owner, but also with the possessor, i.e., the tenant if it is rented to someone else, the usufructuary if the usufruct has been granted by the bare owner, as well as anyone else who possesses the lot (i.e., even someone who wishes to acquire it in the future under the terms and conditions of acquisitive prescription). Practically, it is difficult for anyone to evade their responsibility for clearing the lot, claiming that they are not the owner, as the law does not impose such a restriction.

2.Within what time frame must the clearing be completed?

The time frame within which the clearing of the lot must be completed is entirely different from the period in which the declaration for the clearing must be submitted on the relevant website. This is because, according to the law, the property owner must complete the clearing from April 1 to April 30 each year and must also maintain it cleared from May 1 to October 31 for the same year, which coincides with the duration of the fire prevention period in Greece.

Thus, the time given to the owner for the initial clearing of the lot is 1 month (April, as previously noted), and for the remaining period, the lot must be maintained as cleared. However, since circumstances have changed, the above deadlines for this year have become more indicative than exclusive, and the clearing of lots only needs to be completed (even for the first time) when the deadline for the relevant declarations expires, which, following the recent announcements by the Ministry, has been extended until July 15, 2024.

It is worth noting that for previous years, the deadline for clearing lots and submitting the relevant declarations expired on April 30 of each year. Only for this year has it been exceptionally extended due to difficulties that arose between property owners and municipalities, as we will see below. In any case, it should be kept in mind that even if someone submits their declaration for clearing the lot on time (which they can do until July 15, 2024), if an inspection is conducted on the lot after April 30 and it is found to be uncleared, then, according to the law, penalties and fines for violators can be imposed.

3.The property is jointly owned by more than one person.What can I do in this case?

It is not uncommon in practice for a property/plot to be owned by multiple parties in common, meaning they hold shares of co-ownership over the entire property, without each person having a separate section of the property in their ownership. Since disputes often arise among owners regarding the process and costs of clearing the lot, the law has regulated this issue. It should be noted here that we are not only referring to those who own the lot outright but also to those who have rights over the lot in general (e.g., tenants/sub-tenants/usufructuaries, etc.).

Thus, each co-owner of the property can independently, even without the cooperation of the others, proceed with the clearing of the lot and its subsequent maintenance. Because this is an urgent measure that cannot be delayed, the other co-owners do not need to provide their consent to the one undertaking the clearing of the lot. The same applies, meaning that they can clear the lot even if the others unjustifiably refuse to consent to the clearing.

Regarding the costs, the co-owner who cleared and maintained the lot can seek reimbursement from the others for the expenses incurred (e.g., gardener’s fee/rental of machinery/fuels needed for the operation of the machinery/lost profits from other work not performed because they were occupied with the clearing of the lot, etc.). From each co-owner, they can request the relevant costs proportional to their ownership percentage of the lot; for instance, if a co-owner has a 2/7 share of the lot, they will be liable to pay 2/7 of the total expenses incurred by the one who cleared the lot.

4.Will I face penalties if I do not declare the clearing of the lot?

In the event that the person required to clear the property/lot does not submit the relevant declaration on time (i.e., by July 15, 2024, at the latest) or submits it containing inaccurate/false information, the law stipulates certain penalties for them. More specifically:

• A fine of at least €200 is imposed on the responsible party, calculated per square meter of the property/lot.
• For calculating the fine per square meter, the fine starts from €0.50 (fifty cents), and there is no upper limit to the fine amount.
• If part of the lot/property is cleared and another part is uncleared, the fine will only pertain to the uncleared area.
• Following the imposition of a fine, the municipality in the area where the lot is located may clear it and charge the cleaning costs to the owner who was obligated to ensure its cleaning.
• The costs incurred by the municipality for clearing the lot and the imposed fine constitute revenue for the municipality; they can be collected through forced execution by the State and the seizure of the debtor’s assets even within 2 months, hence caution is required.
• If no declaration for the clearing of the lot is submitted at all, a mandatory fine of €1,000 is imposed on the owner.
• Additionally, if the submitted declaration was false (e.g., stating that the lot was cleared while it is actually uncleared), the offender faces a prison sentence of at least 2 years and a monetary penalty. It should be noted here that under the New Penal Code, prison sentences of 2 years and longer are no longer suspended, and there is a risk of imprisonment for the offender.

5. Can I contest the fine imposed on me?

In order for the law to be lenient towards those who have been fined for not clearing the lot or for failing to submit a clearing declaration, it provides the option to contest the imposed fine. Thus, the obligated party can contest the fine by filing an objection with the municipality’s office within a 10-day period, starting the day after the fine was imposed.

Since the law does not specify anything further, it must be accepted that with this objection, the obligated party can challenge the imposition of the fine on both legal and factual grounds (e.g., that the lot was indeed cleared and the municipality mistakenly deemed it uncleared, or that the height of the vegetation on the lot was not significant enough to be classified as “uncleared,” as required by law to justify the imposition of a fine).

Of course, if the obligated party wishes to contest the fine in court, they can appeal to the Single-Member Administrative Court with the legal remedy of a petition, where the case will be adjudicated on its merits, and both legal and factual reasons can be presented (i.e., pertaining to the essence of the dispute). In any case, in order to take the municipality to court, they must have previously filed the mandatory objection with the municipality’s office, so that their case is reviewed at an earlier stage.

6. If the property is of unknown ownership, does the situation change?

Since many owners have neglected to register their ownership of the lot/property in the Land Registry, the provisions of the law differ at this point. This is done to protect the owner who may even be unaware that they are the owner of the lot (for example, when they inherit the property because they failed to reject the inheritance within the legal timeframe).

More specifically, if the municipality conducts an inspection of the property/lot and determines that it is uncleared, it is obliged to impose a fine on the owner, as mentioned above. However, if the legal owner of the property cannot be found, the municipality is obliged to clear the lot/property, especially in urgent cases due to fire risk, and not impose a fine on the owner, as they are unknown. However, a fine may still be imposed on another occupant of the property, such as the tenant/sub-tenant or usufructuary, if their details are apparent from the public records (Land Registries).

Beyond the imposition of a fine for failing to clear the lot, the absence of the legal owner of a lot has another consequence. If the area to which the lot belongs has been expanded in the Land Registry, and the actual owner has failed to register their ownership in the Land Registry, then after the legal deadlines have passed, the property is considered to belong to the State. This is significant because even if the property does not belong to the State, the owner can no longer contest this, and they may be limited to a compensation claim against the State or against whoever prevented them from declaring their ownership of the property during the implementation of the Land Registry.

7.Do municipalities have responsibilities for uncleared lots?

In recent days, we have been hearing continuously about disputes between citizens and municipalities regarding lots that remain uncleared and the dumping of waste caused by the cleaning of the lot. The law has generally regulated this issue, and it is worth examining what it specifically provides:

•  First, municipalities are obliged to inform citizens every year by the 31st of March about the need to clear their lots (which should be done, as mentioned, in April).
• This notification to citizens can be done in any appropriate manner (e.g., posting on the municipality’s website, informational brochures, etc.).
• Municipalities are also required, during the fire prevention period (from May 1 to October 31), to conduct inspections of lots/properties within their jurisdiction to determine compliance or non-compliance by the owners.
• They may also check electronically the accuracy of the declarations submitted electronically by owners regarding the cleaning of their lots.
• If the municipality determines that a lot is uncleared, it can submit a written report to the fire department for immediate cleaning, especially if there is a significant risk of fire.
• Naturally, municipalities are also responsible for imposing fines in cases of non-compliance by owners, as mentioned above.
• In urgent cases, the municipality may clear the lot using its own resources (with the costs ultimately being charged to the owner, who will be called upon to cover the municipality’s expenses).
• Since the law does not specify anything further, the removal of waste after cleaning must be carried out by whoever cleans the lot each time; if the municipality cleans it ex officio, it must transport the waste itself; otherwise, it is the responsibility of the property owner.

8.What are the responsibilities of the Fire Department in this area?

In addition to the responsibilities of municipalities regarding uncleared lots, responsibilities are also provided for the Fire Department, which is obliged to assist in this area. Thus, the Fire Department must conduct inspections and assessments of lots/properties to check whether they are cleared and meet the legal requirements. If it detects any violations, it sends a written inspection report to the municipality so that the latter can impose a fine on the owner and proceed with cleaning the lot.

Moreover, since the municipality can clean the lot mainly in urgent situations (if there is a very high likelihood of a fire starting in the broader area or if a fire has already started and is approaching threateningly), the Fire Department must grant permission to the municipality so that its personnel can proceed with the cleaning of the lot.

Additionally, the Fire Department must respond to citizen complaints regarding uncleared lots and violations of the law regarding the cleaning of a lot (e.g., if the municipality was supposed to clean the lot and under what conditions). It may also assist in unloading the waste from the cleaning of the lot and transporting it to a designated area to prevent new fire hazards from the waste, as occurred in recent days. It may even check whether the owners’ declarations for the cleaning of their lots were submitted on time, are accurate, or contain false information, and correspondingly report the results to the Ministry of the Environment and the municipality.

9.What penalties are now provided for the crime of arson?

Following the recent wildfires in Greece that caused widespread ecological destruction, lawmakers have decided to take measures to impose even stricter penalties on those who cause fires, especially if they occur in forested areas. Thus:

• The perpetrator is primarily punished with imprisonment and a monetary fine if the fire poses a risk only to foreign property (i.e., not a risk to human life).
•  If significant damage is caused to public utility installations (e.g., ports/airports/squares) or severe bodily harm is inflicted on a person, the perpetrator faces imprisonment (from 5 to 20 years) and a monetary fine.
• If someone dies as a result of the fire (regardless of the cause of death), the perpetrator faces life imprisonment.
• All of the above apply provided that the perpetrator acted with intent, meaning they were aware of and accepted the risk of causing a fire and one of the above results.
• Conversely, if they were negligent in causing the fire, they are punished with imprisonment of up to 3 years (and in some cases, a monetary fine).
• The penalty for the perpetrator increases to 10 years of imprisonment if the fire occurred in a forested area and could pose a danger to human life.
• In the case of a fire in a forested area, even if the perpetrator acted negligently, they will be punished with at least 3 years of imprisonment and a monetary fine if significant environmental degradation/destruction occurred in the area as a result of the fire.
• According to the law, even a person who lights a fire for any reason (e.g., barbecuing/welding metals) when the fire risk index is 4 or 5 (i.e., very high) in the area that day will be punished.
• If the aforementioned (seemingly simple) fire causes environmental destruction in the area or severe bodily harm to another person, the perpetrator will be punished with at least 10 years of imprisonment and a monetary fine.
• Additionally, anyone storing flammable materials in forests is punished, and if those materials contributed to the spread of the fire, then a sentence of at least 3 years of imprisonment and a monetary fine will be imposed.

10. And what about the perpetrator’s tools?What happens to them?

This specific provision of the law pertains to the crime of arson in forests and not to common arson, which is simply the causing of a fire outside forested areas that has other significant consequences. Therefore, it is important to know whether the fire was caused in a forested area or in an area designated for reforestation, as well as in Natura areas (i.e., protected areas from industrial and other activities, especially from causing fires), since the legal consequences change based on an important factor that may not always be clear, as many areas do not have a clear environmental status.

In the case of a fire in a forest or even an attempt to cause one, the court may confiscate part of the perpetrator’s property, which will include the tools and raw materials used for the crime. It may also confiscate a corresponding monetary value from the perpetrator’s property (e.g., a car/property of the perpetrator) that corresponds to the damage caused by the arson or attempted arson. However, necessary financial means for the perpetrator’s survival are exempt from confiscation (e.g., the non-seizable limit of 1,250 euros monthly from salaries/pensions/benefits, etc.).

However, for the perpetrator’s property to be confiscated in the case of arson, there must have been severe bodily harm/death to another person caused by the fire, or the fire must have spread over a large area, or there must have been significant ecological/environmental destruction in the broader area. It is not enough for a fire to have occurred in a forest; there must also be at least one of the aforementioned results. However, typically, a forest fire also has these additional consequences, as demonstrated by the recent experiences with fires in Greece.

Next to the client and his needs.

Athina Kontogianni-Lawyer

The above does not constitute legal advice, and no responsibility is assumed for it. For more information, please contact us.