In a case handled by advocate Maciej Obrębski and attorney-at-law Jakub Dobkiewicz, a favorable administrative decision has been issued concerning a manor-and-park complex in southern Greater Poland (Wielkopolska). The authority confirmed that the residential part of the former estate (the manor house with the park and its immediate surroundings) should not be treated as property subject to takeover for the purposes of the agrarian reform.
Disputes arising from the agrarian reform regime very often come down to one question: whether a given part of a former estate was functionally connected with the operation of an agricultural holding, or whether it had a separate character – residential, representative, and park-related.
In this case, it was crucial to demonstrate that the manor-and-park complex was not an element necessary for agricultural production and therefore did not fall within the purpose and scope of the post-war agrarian reform. The authority accepted this line of argument, basing its reasoning largely on the facts established by the law firm. Thanks to extensive archival research, it was shown how the last pre-war owners used the manor-and-park complex, how they perceived it, and even what plans they had for it – plans that the outbreak of the war prevented from being realized.
Historical background: the manor as the landed gentry’s “seasonal address”
Manor-and-park complexes in Greater Poland were not only the estate’s base of operations, but also a family’s showcase and a local center of social life. In practice, the owners of such properties often did not live in the manor on a day-to-day basis – their permanent “address” was frequently in a larger city (most often a regional administrative or economic center), and their stays at the manor were seasonal: for hunting, family visits, management of the farm, or important events.
This also explains why, in many cases examined decades later, it is so important to separate two distinct worlds:
- the farm and agricultural production (fields, farm buildings, infrastructure), and
- the residence with its park (a residential and representative function, symbolic in nature, often unrelated to production).
A few words on agrarian reform: why do these cases return after decades?
The 1944 Decree on Agrarian Reform was one of the most consequential instruments of the post-war restructuring of land ownership. In practice, however, its implementation was not uniform: in different regions, authorities assessed differently which parts of former estates were “agricultural” and which – especially residential parts – should not have been included in the takeover.
Today, proceedings in such cases focus on reconstructing realities from several decades ago: the functions of individual parts of the estate, how they were used, the spatial layout, and the actual links to the agricultural holding. That is why arguments based on function and connection to agricultural production often prove decisive. Obtaining a final decision confirming that the property does not fall under the agrarian reform regime in many cases opens the way for the heirs of pre-war owners to pursue compensation for unlawfully taken property, and sometimes even to recover it in kind.