Area: .nan
Competent authority: MOP
EZU URL: .nan
Initiative ID: 1156
Initiative accepted and completed: '2021-08-23'
Initiative classified in EZU: .nan
Initiative forwarded in response: '2021-07-26'
Initiative published: '2021-07-26'
Initiative submitted: '2021-07-22'
Response from the competent authority: Answer from the Ministry of the Environment
  and Spatial Planning:The provision of Article 35(3) of the Building Act is often
  used in practice, but only for the cases specified in the Act. This means that the
  consent of the operator of a public road is considered as evidence of the right
  to build only in cases where construction of utility infrastructure facilities or
  connections to utility infrastructure is carried out in the road body of the public
  road. However, we cannot give you an answer to the question why the administrative
  unit does not apply this provision in a specific case, since the establishment of
  facts and the taking of evidence are part of the specific administrative procedure,
  which is conducted by the competent administrative authority in accordance with
  the provisions of the General Administrative Procedure Act. The Ministry of the
  Environment and Spatial Planning cannot and should not decide on specific matters
  which are not within its competence, nor can it give a legal opinion on a specific
  case pending before an administrative unit. We are prohibited from doing so by the
  rules governing the general administrative procedure, and also by the fact that
  the Ministry here decides on appeals against decisions taken by administrative units.
  If the investor disagrees with the decision of the administrative body, he can protect
  his rights in the appeal procedure.
Text file: 1156.txt
Title: Article 35(3) of the Building Act
URL: https://www.stopbirokraciji.gov.si/pobuda/?st=1156
