How can I legally obtain farmer status

77 The “individual” farmer as a participant in real estate transactions under Polish and German law Paweł Blajer I. Introduction The term “individual farmer” is not known to German legislation in the field of agriculture. In Germany, there is no other legal general definition that specifies certain requirements for natural persons working in agriculture, the fulfillment of which would grant these persons a special status in the regulations on property transactions. One can even state that a recognizable aversion to the formation of general definitions and the development of fundamental terms within the framework of the system of agricultural law is characteristic of the German legislature1. The legislative technique consequently employed by him lies in the fact that the norms of substantive law that regulate certain facts are primarily introduced. The requirements that a farmer has to meet in order to be an addressee of such standards are given only secondary. It therefore seems to be justified to conclude that individual subjective requirements addressed to farmers who are natural persons are formulated a casu ad casum in the German legal acts, and their scope is to be limited exclusively to these specific normative acts. Although reading the German legal acts itself does not produce any significant results, the analysis of German case law and teaching offers completely different research results. Because these sources provide an extensive research material, and bring different and multiple contradicting constructions, which are based on laconic statements of the legislature. Incidentally, it may be that it is precisely this laconism on the part of the legislator in the formulation of general terms and definitions that not only encouraged the German courts and the proponents of the theory to do so, but even forced them to fill this gap with their own concepts. Nevertheless, it should be stressed that the texts of the legislative acts always provide a framework for any analysis of the solutions adopted by them. From this point of view, the most interesting legal acts are undoubtedly the broadly understood land and agricultural traffic, which - sometimes even indirectly - make certain subjective demands on their addressees. Based on the regulations contained in these normative acts, German jurisprudence and teaching have developed such subjective terms as “full-time” or “part-time farmer” or “non-farmer”, which are the subject of the following considerations. 1 Lichorowicz, Status prawny gospodarstw rodzinnych w ustawodawstwie krajów Europy zachodniej, Białystok 2000, p.133; Blajer, Koncepcja prawna rolnika indywidualnego w prawie polskim na tle porównawczym, Kraków, 2009, p. 65 78 The problem of the subjective demands placed on natural persons who take part in real estate transactions is dealt with differently by the Polish legislature, which is contained in the basic law of April 11, 2003 on the design of the agricultural structure (AgStG-PL) formulated a general definition of the individual farmer, which becomes part of a broader definition - ie a family farm, which according to Art. 23 of the constitution of the RP, the basis of the agricultural structure of the Polish state. The provision in Art. 6 of this law, which was substantially amended in 2011, provides a very detailed definition of the “individual” farmer, which is substantiated by a whole series of diverse criteria, and above all this numerous category of subjects who are natural persons and run their farms, with the common name "names", determined. The formal meaning of this term for the Polish real estate trade is also indicated by other provisions of the Act on the Design of Agricultural Structure, which determine its scope of application in a relatively broad manner. According to Article 1 of the aforementioned law, it specifies “the principles for shaping the state's agricultural structure”, including: by ensuring that the agricultural activity on the farm is carried out by people with the appropriate qualifications. The AgStG-PL is not limited to the specification of subjective criteria on which the definition of the individual farmer is based, but also points out some legal consequences that the fulfillment of these criteria has for the person concerned. In the end, the regulations of the Polish agricultural law are an exact contrast to the German solutions. First of all, a legal basic definition of the individual farmer is formulated, and then the legislature directs numerous norms to the subjects who meet the designates of this definition, which above all privilege them and which define the special status of individual farmers in Poland. The aim of the present study is therefore to compare the solutions adopted in Germany and Poland in connection with the subjective criteria that are addressed to natural persons participating in real estate transactions and with the legal consequences of fulfilling these criteria. Further discussions will be held taking into account the above-mentioned fundamental differences in the area of ​​legislative technology adopted by the German and Polish legislators. II. Subjective requirements for natural persons who take part in real estate transactions in Germany and Poland. Real estate traffic sensu largo, i.e. both in relation to property and lease, is subject in Germany to the restrictions resulting from two legal acts - the law of July 28, 1961 on measures to improve the agricultural structure and to secure land and Forestry operations (Land Traffic Act - GrdstVG) and the law of 8 November 1985 on the notification and complaint of land lease contracts (Land Lease Traffic Act - LpachtVG). The first of those acts introduces the general principle that the contract for the sale of the land requires the 79 administrative authorization of the business for the validity of the land sale contract. The other, however, makes the validity of the contract on the lease of the property dependent on the non-objection on the part of the public administration authority. The prerequisite for the refusal of the approval of the contract for the sale of a property or for the objection to a land lease contract with regard to the property is in both cases "the emergence of an unhealthy distribution of land use) as a result of the sale or leasing of the property. The unhealthy distribution of land use occurs when the sale or lease “contradicts the measures to improve the agricultural structure”. The duty to interpret these two ambiguous expressions has taken on the jurisprudence and teaching, whose achievements in this area are really excellent. Among various facts that lead to the unhealthy distribution of land use, and thus justify the refusal of the approval of the sales contract or the objection to the land lease, the most frequently mentioned situation is the situation in which agricultural or forestry land - regardless of who - is sold, the buyer is a non-farmer and there is a full-time or part-time farmer who has a business that is worthy of and in need of topping up, who is urgently dependent on the area and who is willing and able to conclude a contract with the seller under the conditions that this had agreed with the acquiring non-farmer. ”2. The above-mentioned formula, which is an original work of German judicature, contains terms with a strictly subjective character, such as a full-time or part-time farmer or non-farmer. The meaning of these terms can also be found in the work of the German courts and in the specialist literature relating to agriculture. The definition of the full-time farmer was formulated by the German Supreme Court in its decision of 1979, based on the criteria of working hours used for agricultural activity and the income earned from this activity. These criteria were taken as the basis for the term full-time farmer in the so-called "Modernization Directive" of the EC Council from 1972. Nonetheless, in the cited decision, the Supreme Court distinguishes two subcategories of full-time farmers, in that this term includes both full-time and part-time farmers. The full-time farmer earns 90 percent or more of his total income from agricultural activity. The part-time farmer, on the other hand, earns at least 50% but less than 90% of his total income from agricultural activity. On the other hand - regardless of the level of income achieved - the farmer concerned is considered a full-time farmer, provided that he uses his entire (100%) manpower for the agricultural activity on his own farm3. 2 Hötzel [in:] Landlachtrecht, 3rd edition, 2005 pp. 820f .; Grimm, Agrarrecht, Munich, 2004, p. 48 3 Grimm, Agrarrecht ... op.cit., P. 13; Hötzel [in:] Land lease law ... op.cit. P. 824. 80 The cited opinion of the Supreme Court indicates that the Supreme Court did not shy away from deviating significantly from the Community model, although it was influenced by the solutions adopted in the “Modernization Directive” of the EC. Above all at the level of Community law, the two criteria which serve the legal outsourcing of the full-time farmer remained inextricably linked. In Germany, on the other hand, the concept of full-time farmer for the purpose of real estate transactions is developed based on the same criteria of profitability and working hours; however, these are treated independently and autonomously. If only the person concerned earns a corresponding amount of income from agricultural activity, the working hours used for this activity are irrelevant. And vice versa: if the farmer in question devotes most of the working hours to his agricultural activity, then the income he earns from this activity is irrelevant. This view allows the institution of the full-time farmer to be treated more flexibly and thus to use it for the purpose of controlling property transactions. The definition of the part-time farmer or part-time farmer is constructed in accordance with the similar rules in German case law and specialist literature, for whom a person who leads the agricultural activity is considered, whereby the income generated by him from this activity is less than 50% of his total income and the working time used by him for agricultural activity is less than half of his total working time4. It should be noted that with regard to the term part-time farmer, case law and doctrine return to the conjunction of both criteria, i.e. time and profitability. In the more recent specialist literature, however, approaches predominate according to which the main meaning in this regard is to be ascribed to the criterion of the amount of income generated from agricultural activity and the criterion of working hours is to be regarded exclusively as an auxiliary criterion5. Thus, although on the basis of the criterion of profitability the upper limit of the scope of the concept of part-time farmer can be set, after which it is referred to as the full-time farmer, when the lower limit of the scope of the concept of part-time farmer is defined, it is considered by the Non-farmer is supposed to separate problems on. In general, there are two directions in interpretation in German specialist literature. According to the first interpretation, the status of part-time farmer still has a person who cultivates at least 2 hectares of agricultural land or - apart from the actual area of ​​the land cultivated - produces crops in the amount that corresponds to the market value of the 2 hectares of agricultural land usually obtained Products corresponds to 6. The opponents of this view, however, accuse it of arbitrariness and lack of legal bases and thus the establishment exclusively on economic conditions7. Instead, they suggest adopting a more flexible criterion according to which the 4 See in particular: Hötzel [in:] Landpachtrecht ... op.cit. S. 827. 5 Grimm, Agrarrecht ... op.cit., S. 13 6 Pilz, Die Nebenerwerbslandwirtschaft im Agrarrecht, SR-Göttingen, 1987, S. 7 7 Hötzel [in:] Landpachtrecht ... op.cit. S. 827. 81 People who conduct agricultural activity exclusively in their leisure time, who consider this activity a hobby and who are amateurs in this area, should not be considered part-time farmers. The a priori determination of the lower limit of the scope of the term part-time farmer would consequently be completely unfounded; this question must be decided in concrete terms. In the opinion of the German case law, the above criteria of profitability and working time - in relation to full-time farmers - should be supplemented by further requirements. In particular, it is emphasized that such a person should also be suitable for managing agricultural activities on their farm. Above all, suitability means having appropriate professional qualifications (theoretical training or professional experience), but also having very specific personal characteristics or even character traits. It was left to the administrative authorities to assess whether the person in question is suitable for running the agricultural activity, which leads the procedure for granting the approval of the contract for the sale of a plot of land or for objecting to the land lease. The requirement of the suitability of the person concerned for the management of the agricultural activity, for which there is no legal legal basis in Germany, and which only results from the case law and the statements of the teaching, has no absolute character here either. It is always of fundamental importance whether agriculture is a main occupation for the person concerned, and this fact is determined on the basis of the criterion of profitability or working hours. In the specialist literature it is emphasized that even the best trained farmer with excellent professional preparation cannot rely on his status as a full-time farmer if he has commissioned a third person to manage the agricultural activity on his farm and himself as a whole for non-agricultural activity. Therefore, the requirement of the suitability of the person who meets the criteria of working hours or profitability will only make it impossible to invoke the status of full-time farmer in exceptional cases: for example, if the person concerned is responsible for managing the agricultural activity as a full-time farmer may be at great risk in the near future due to poor health8. In contrast to the above definitions, which are the work of German jurisprudence and doctrine, the Polish law on the design of the agricultural structure expressly decides that the definition of the individual farmer make up the following criteria: - the so-called criterion of area, according to to whom an individual farmer is a natural person who is an owner, usufructuary, owner or leaseholder of the agricultural land, the total area of ​​which does not exceed 300 ha; 8 Hötzel [in:] Land lease law ... op.cit. S. 824. 82 - The residence criterion according to which an individual farmer should have lived for at least five years in the municipality in which one of the agricultural properties belonging to the farm is located, this fact being accompanied by a certificate of registration for the permanent address must be confirmed; - Criterion of personal management of the agricultural holding, according to which an individual farmer personally leads the agricultural holding, provided that he a) works in this holding, b) makes all decisions which concern the management of the agricultural holding. - Criterion of "agricultural qualifications", which is a special "confusion" of two agricultural qualifications previously treated separately - i.e.theoretical and practical qualifications - presupposes that only a person with a strictly agricultural vocational training, university entrance qualification or university degree can refer to the theoretical qualifications alone. In other cases, a certain length of employment in agriculture is still necessary, whereby the better education the person concerned has, the shorter this length of employment is. Since the entry into force of the AgStG-PL, the way in which the above criteria were edited has been largely criticized in Polish specialist literature relating to agriculture. Even a major correction by their editing, which was made on the basis of the amendment to the Act AgStG-PL from 2011, has not changed that. With regard to the way in which the criterion of land is formulated, objections are raised by the fact that it does not take into account any other potential legal titles for agricultural land, in particular numerous cases of dependent ownership of these land - e.g. due to usufruct or loan agreements, which creates a back door will be kept open for attempts to circumvent the area standard of 300 hectares in the future. The teaching also asserts that the criteria based on the strictly defined area norms - as anachronistic - are seldom to be met in the agricultural regulations that apply in the Western European countries, and are moreover subject to the reproach of the arbitrariness of the solutions adopted. The sense of maintaining this criterion in the future is thus called into question9. In the case of the residence criterion, please note that this requirement must be met by both Polish citizens and foreigners. The obligation directed at them to have to live for 5 years in the municipality in which one of the agricultural land belonging to the farm is located, however, justifies the suspicion of the representatives of the Polish doctrine, who mainly apply this criterion see an obstacle in the acquisition of the status of individual farmer by foreigners - in particular by the citizens of the Member States of the European Union - and thus an instrument to protect Polish agricultural land from being bought up by themselves10. 9 Blajer, Koncepcja prawna rolnika indywidualnego… op.cit., P. 259f. 10 Lichorowicz, Instrumenty oddziaływania na Strukturę gruntową Polski w ustawie z 11 kwietnia 2003r. o kształtowaniu ustroju rolnego, Kwartalnik Prawa Prywatnego, 2004, H.2, p. 393f. 83 be that - from the point of view of the approaching year 2016 and the end of the transition period after which the citizens of the member states of the European Union can purchase the agricultural and forestry land on the territory of the RP without having to obtain a permit from the Ministry of Interior - the criterion of residence becomes an effective obstacle to obtaining the status of individual farmer and thus to the acquisition of agricultural land by them under the official preferential conditions reserved for this category of farmers. The editing of the criterion of personal management of the agricultural business was specified in the 2011 amendment. On the basis of this, it was determined more precisely that one of the most important prerequisites that testify to the personal management of the agricultural holding is the work on that holding, to the extent and with the frequency corresponding to the character of the production carried out, and the loss the ability to work on the farm means the loss of management. The legislature has thus recognized that the family farm, which is a qualified type of family farm, is based on the work of the farmer in charge of the farm, and thus the requirement of work on the farm must not be ignored when developing the definition of the individual farmer be left. Nevertheless, the new regulation cannot dispel all doubts, mainly because the terms used are imprecise and the duty to work on the farm remains unclear. Because the legislature has not decided how the farmer should do this work on his farm. Is the work on the farm to be understood as the continuous activity of the farmer directly in the agricultural production, which would be limited to physical labor and directly connected with the manufacture of certain products, or is only occasional, seasonal, in which to meet this requirement Does the farm or work limited to administrative management suffice? Does the work of the individual farmer finally require that he is not allowed to take up employment elsewhere, or on the contrary: his ability to work outside of agriculture should not be restricted in any measure? 11 The a priori approach of the legislature described above, which the Making management of the farm identical to work in such a production site was also criticized in Polish teaching, which pointed out that the two criteria - work in the farm and its personal management - are sharply opposed to each other in Western European legislation and treated as two completely separate, independent subjective requirements. Also at the level of some Polish agricultural regulations, the requirement of “personal management of the farm” was limited to managerial or administrative functions, without it being necessary to do the work in agricultural production by hand. 11 Blajer, Koncepcja prawna… op.cit ., P. 259. 84 exercise. Elsewhere, however, it was emphasized that “the management and administration of the agricultural holding is connected with personal efforts to ensure that it functions properly and with the continuous, personal performance of necessary work”. In connection with this, the approach of the Polish legislature that the view of work on the farm as the most important prerequisite for the personal management of the farm is undisputed can be questioned. The amendment from 2011 also failed to remedy another deficiency in the earlier editing of the criterion of personal management of the farm, which was that an individual farmer should make “all” decisions about the management of the agricultural activity on his farm. As a result, the previous semantic awkwardness remained in the definition of the individual farmer, which in the area of ​​the family farm has ruled out all work and task division, which is characteristic of the farm run by an agricultural family. Only the current edition of the criterion of agricultural qualifications, which can be traced back to the local tradition of legislation, which refers to the narrow, "abstract" conception of this criterion, with division into practical and theoretical qualifications, which determine precisely, does not raise any major concerns indicates whether the person concerned has these qualifications12. The effort to standardize the term “agricultural qualifications” within the entire Polish system of agricultural law is also noteworthy. Because the definition of these qualifications in the AgStG-PL is the literal repetition of the manner in which they are determined in the regulations for some measures within the framework of the program for the development of village areas in the years 2007-2013. III. Legal consequences of fulfilling the subjective criteria in the context of real estate transactions in Germany and Poland In order for a legal sale to be valid, the German Real Estate Transfer Act (GrdstVG) requires official approval from the responsible public administration body. The importance of this administrative act is expressed primarily in the fact that it is the sine qua non requirement for the expulsion of the new owner in the land register that is kept for the agricultural property to be sold, which is consequently the condition for the effective transfer of ownership of this property in German law is (§ 873 BGB). The Land Lease Traffic Act (LpachtVG) introduces a slightly different test procedure. A land lease agreement, which is concluded according to the regulations §§ 585-598 BGBB, is completely valid and effective. By virtue of the regulation § 2 LpachtVG, the lessor is obliged to inform the competent authority about the land lease agreement 12 Blajer, Wymóg kwalifikacji rolniczych w obrocie nieruchomościami rolnymi (studium prawnoporównawcze), Przegląd Prawa Rolnego, 2008, p. 51 2 (4), p. 51 2 (4), no. 85 by submitting a copy of this contract or - if the contract was not concluded in writing - verbally informing the authority of its conditions. On the other hand, the consequence of the notification is the initiation of administrative proceedings about any objections to the contract, as a result of which the administrative authority can object to the contract in the form of a notice. In this decision, the administrative authority can oblige the land lease contracting parties to dissolve the contract or to change it in a certain way. If the contracting parties fail to comply with this request, the land lease contract will be recognized as terminated at the end of the period specified in the notification, unless the parties had previously submitted a judicial application for the final decision. However, the strict legal form of the administrative inspection of property transactions, which arose with the two laws discussed above, is also somewhat restricted and these restrictions are mainly due to the refusal of the approval of the contract for the sale of the agricultural property or the objection to the contract on the leasing of the property in question are dependent on enumeratively listed conditions. The catalog of these prerequisites was formulated similarly in both laws, which means that this is the case both for the cancellation of the approval of the contract for the sale of agricultural property (Section 9 GrdstVG) and for the complaint about the notified land lease contract (Section 4 LpachtVG) is supposed to ensure that the sale or leasing leads to the “unhealthy distribution of land use”. According to the above position of the jurisprudence and the doctrine, which has already become a formula, “the sale (leasing) leads to the unhealthy distribution of the land use if agricultural or forestry land is sold - regardless of who by whom - the purchaser is a non-farmer and a full-time or part-time farmer is available who has a business that is worth increasing and in need of increasing, who is urgently dependent on the area and who is willing and able to conclude a contract with the seller on the terms and conditions that the seller has with the acquirer Non-farmer had agreed. " It should therefore be emphasized that the German case law, in the practical implementation of the above-cited formula, does not ruthlessly require the purchaser or leaseholder of an agricultural property to have the status of full-time farmer or at least part-time farmer. So it is not the case that in every case in which a non-farmer acquires or leases an agricultural property, the administrative authority should refuse the approval of the transfer of ownership or object to the land lease. At this point, the German system develops a special competitive relationship and a precedent between several people interested in the acquisition or lease of an agricultural property. In other words: one cannot talk about the unhealthy distribution of land use in the case when none of the people interested in buying or leasing agricultural land have the status of full-time farmer or at least part-time farmer. The authority is also not entitled to cancel the approval of the transfer of ownership agreement with regard to an agricultural property on this basis (objecting to the land lease agreement) if, apart from the purchaser (lessee), no other person is on the property to be sold (leased) was interested. In both of the above situations, the authority is not entitled to examine any subjective requirements on the part of the purchaser (lessee) as part of the administrative procedure. Nothing stands in the way that the agricultural property in question can also be acquired (leased) by a non-farmer13. The situation is completely different if several people apply for the property to be sold or leased, including those who have the status of full-time or part-time farmer. In this case, the full-time farmer has "priority" in the acquisition or in the lease, then it is the part-time farmer's turn and in last place comes the non-farmer. This unusual "priority" is expressed in the fact that in the case in question the agricultural property is acquired (leased) by a part-time farmer or non-farmer, and a full-time farmer applies for the same property and other requirements are met, ie he leads one agricultural business that deserves to be enlarged, urgently needs this plot of land and is able to conclude a sale (lease) contract with the seller (lessor) under the conditions comparable to those set out in the contract between the seller (lessor) and the Acquirer (lessee) apply, then in this case the administrative authority can determine that the sale agreement (lease) leads to the unhealthy distribution of the land use and on this basis reject its approval (or object to the lease). A similar situation occurs when the purchaser (lessee) of the agricultural property is a non-farmer and a part-time farmer applies for the same property and the other requirements mentioned above are met. A full-time farmer always has special priority over the part-time farmer and a non-farmer. There are two major exceptions to the above rule, according to which a part-time farmer should always withdraw from a full-time farmer, which make these two subjective terms identical several times: If an agricultural property is leased to the part-time farmer, this is to be considered in the same way as the full-time farmer when assessing whether the lease leads to the unhealthy distribution of land use, provided that the following two conditions are met: 1) He is a farmer in the In accordance with the provision in Section 1 (2) of the Act on Old-Age Insurance for Farmers and 2) as a result of the management of the agricultural activity on the leased property or on the farm, the livelihood of the farmer and the family members belonging to his household improves significantly. 13 Lange [in:] Commentary on Land Lease Law, 3rd Edition, Munich, 1989, p. 517. 87 B / According to the opinion of German teaching, the task of the GrdstVG and the LpachtVG is also to spread the status of full-time farmer among farmers who don't have it yet14. This view has its practical consequences in the fact that the person who only fulfills the requirements for obtaining this status as a result of the concluded contract for the acquisition of the agricultural property or its lease (a part-time farmer or a non-farmer on the way to becoming a full-time farmer ), is treated in the same way as the farmer who already has this status. This practice applies both to those who were previously only part-time farmers and to those who were not farmers at all. The restrictions on the movement of real estate in the Polish law on the design of the agricultural structure, on the other hand, are based on a completely different pattern compared to the German solutions.They lie in the fact that all cases of the transfer of ownership of the agricultural property are generally controlled by a special state legal entity, namely the Agency for Agricultural Land (ANR), which works for the benefit of the state treasury and which either has the right of first refusal on this property ( if it is sold), or the right to acquire it (if the transfer of ownership of the agricultural property occurs as a result of the conclusion of a contract other than a sales contract). For the problem of the status of individual farmers in Polish law, the catalog of exceptions to the above general rule is of the greatest importance. In the case of the contract on the transfer of ownership of an agricultural property that is acquired by an individual farmer for the purpose of expanding the family farm, but only up to an area of ​​300 ha, the business is subject to the aforementioned right of first refusal or right of purchase by the Agricultural Agency Land not restricted. In other words: if the person in question does not meet the above-mentioned requirements for obtaining the status of individual farmer, they must - in accordance with the Act on the Design of the Agricultural Structure - when purchasing an agricultural property with the right of first refusal or purchase right to which the ANR is entitled Calculate the plot. As long as the ANR does not exercise the rights to which it is entitled, the acquisition of the agricultural land by a person who does not have the status of an individual farmer becomes perfectly valid and effective15. As in Germany, the rule that the same validity of the acquisition of ownership of the agricultural property is dependent on the fulfillment of certain subjective requirements by the purchaser does not apply in Poland either. Because the property can also be effectively acquired by a person without the status of an individual farmer within the meaning of the AgStG-PL. Nonetheless, the above privilege reserved for individual farmers has limited practical relevance. Above all, this results from the fact that the AgStG-PL covers cases of the acquisition of an agricultural property by the 14 Hötzel [in:] Landlachtrecht ... op.cit. P. 826. 15 Lichorowicz Instrumenty oddziaływania na Strukturę gruntową Polski… op.cit., P.395. 88 excluded the acquirer's neighbor from the control of the ANR - which was implemented through the right of first refusal or acquisition right - and thus decided that these persons do not have to be individual farmers and therefore do not have to meet any subjective criteria. The notarial practice, however, indicates that most transactions take place in the context of real estate transactions between people who are close to each other. In addition, the introduction of the regulation in 2010 contributed to the impairment of the status of individual farmers, according to which the ANR's right of first refusal and purchase only becomes valid if the subject of the contract is an agricultural property with an area of ​​at least 5 hectares. As a result, the number of contracts that are restricted by the above rights of the ANR has decreased significantly. The practical significance of the privilege reserved for individual farmers in the AgStG-PL, which enabled them to acquire agricultural land without the intervention of the ANR, was consequently weakened. Currently, the institution of the individual farmer plays an essential role, especially in the regulations for the distribution of state agricultural land, as the group of potential participants in the award procedure for the sale (and for the lease) of the land from the agricultural property of the tax authorities, which regulated by the second law of October 19, 1991 on the management of agricultural land owned by the tax authorities. According to this Act, the Agricultural Land Agency - as the organizer of the procurement procedure - can reserve the right, among other things, to allow only individual farmers within the meaning of the provisions on the organization of the agricultural structure who want to expand their family farm if they want to participate in the procurement procedure Have residence in the municipality in which the property to be awarded is located, or in the municipality that borders on this municipality, or persons who have agricultural qualifications, which are mentioned in the regulations on the design of the agricultural structure, and an agricultural one Want to start a family business within the meaning of these regulations. Another institution that is supposed to lead to the spread of agricultural property among people with the status of individual farmer is the right of first refusal granted to them under the AgStG-PL, provided they are tenants of the property to be sold, and the property to be acquired is part of their family business belongs (Art. 3 Abs. 1 AgStG-PL). The importance of this regulation is relatively minor. IV. Conclusion In the context of the summary of the mentioned comments, the completely different solutions adopted in Poland and Germany in the field of subjective requirements for natural persons who take part in real estate transactions as well as the legal consequences of their fulfillment should be emphasized. The differences relate to the fundamental questions: In Germany, the legislature does not develop a definition with a subjective character that would then be applied in the regulations for controlling real estate transactions, and any subjective criteria that are addressed to the participants in real estate transactions are creative Provision of jurisprudence and teaching relating to agriculture. In Poland, on the other hand, the general institution of the individual farmer applies in this regard, which has its legal justification. The same subjective criteria, which are used by the German judicature on the one hand for the development of the concept of the full-time farmer and on the other hand by the Polish legislature for the development of the concept of the individual farmer, are quite different, whereby the much more flexible and more reasonable character of the German Emphasize solutions. In deviation from this, the control of the real estate movement itself is ultimately exercised in Germany and Poland, and this thus has very different legal consequences of the above-mentioned subjective requirements in both countries. But there are also certain similarities between the two systems of agricultural law. In both Poland and Germany, according to the regulations, emphasis is placed on the status and qualifications of the person who acquires agricultural land by means of legal transactions inter vivos. Nevertheless, the fulfillment of certain subjective requirements - e.g. having agricultural qualifications - is not the sine qua non for acquiring agricultural land in any of these countries, as was the case in Poland for example until 1990. As a result, the practical significance of the subjective requirements in the area of ​​control of the movement of property is small in both countries. In Poland, the importance of the basic privilege reserved for individual farmers - i.e. exemption of the property they have acquired in the agricultural land from the right of first refusal of the Agricultural Land Agency - is also limited, as there are currently only a few cases in which the ANR's right of first refusal is currently up to date and the ANR does not like to take advantage of the right of first refusal, even if it is due. For this reason, specific demands are formulated in the Polish specialist literature, which want to ensure the proper importance of the institution of the individual farmer, at least because of their justification in the constitution.