Construction Near a Forest: The Authorities Cannot Require You to Waive Your Right to Compensation in Advance

A developer may enter into such an agreement voluntarily, but the authority may not make the issuance of a building permit contingent on the developer’s prior waiver of its private-law claims. The decisive factor is compliance with public-law conditions, in particular the binding opinion of the state forestry authority.

Construction within 30 meters of a forest: this is not a ban, but a special assessment

The Forest Act stipulates that if a project affects land within 30 meters of the forest edge, a binding opinion from the state forestry authority is required. Typically, this authority is the municipal office with extended powers. This does not mean that construction within this distance is automatically prohibited. It means that the authority must assess whether the project will jeopardize interests protected by the Forest Act.

In practice, the main considerations are whether the structure will restrict forest management, degrade the forest’s condition, interfere with the root zone, jeopardize the stability of the tree stand, or be itself excessively at risk from falling trees. The state forestry authority may issue a favorable opinion, a favorable opinion with conditions, or, if applicable, an unfavorable opinion.

It is important to distinguish between two levels. The first is public law: whether the structure meets the conditions under building and forestry law. The second is private law: what the relationship will be between the builder and the owner of the adjacent forest, for example, if damage were to occur in the future. These two levels should not be conflated.

What the Building Authority Actually Needs to Approve a Construction Project

For the building authority, the key document is a binding opinion from the state forestry administration, or a unified environmental opinion if the project is assessed under that regime. Today, the unified environmental opinion replaces a number of separate administrative acts in the field of the environment and is issued as a binding opinion for projects approved under the Building Act.

Conversely, an agreement with Lesy ČR or another forest owner to waive the right to compensation for damages is not a document without which the building authority could not make a decision. The Ombudsman explicitly stated that the existence or absence of such an agreement does not, in and of itself, determine whether the authority will approve the construction.

Therefore, if a builder is told that “without signing the agreement, they will not receive a permit,” they should be wary. The proper course of action is to contact the relevant building authority or state forestry administration directly and request a written explanation of which documents are truly necessary. The authority should only require documents that are supported by legal regulations.

What is the status of Lesy ČR or another forest owner?

Lesy ČR or another owner of an adjacent forest may be a party to the proceedings if their ownership or other real right may be directly affected by the proposed project. The Building Act includes among the parties to the proceedings, among others, persons whose ownership or other real rights to adjacent land or structures may be directly affected by the decision.

This means that a forest owner may raise objections in the proceedings and, within the limits of the law, challenge the decision. He cannot be excluded from the proceedings merely because he proposes to the developer that they reach an agreement. Similarly, however, he cannot confuse his status as a party with the role of a government agency. The decision on whether a construction project is permissible from the perspective of forest protection is not made by the forest owner, but by the competent state forestry authority.

The forest owner may point out risks, propose conditions, or defend their property. However, they cannot effectively dictate to the developer that the authority must not approve the construction unless the developer waives future claims. Such a requirement belongs in private-law negotiations, not among the mandatory documents for the building permit process.

Waiver of Damages: Why Great Caution Is Required

An agreement to waive the right to compensation for damages can be significant under civil law. The Civil Code even expressly provides that if someone waives the right to claim damages arising on a parcel of land and this waiver is recorded in a public registry, it may be enforceable against subsequent owners as well. In practice, this explains why registration in the real estate cadastre is sometimes required.

This is precisely why a developer should not automatically sign such an agreement. It can have implications not only for the developer but also for future owners of the land. If the developer were to sell the land later, the buyer could be bound by an agreement that the original owner accepted in connection with the building permit proceedings.

At the same time , however , it is not true that one can waive any claim in advance. The Civil Code stipulates thatany agreement that in advance excludes or limits compensation for harm to a person’s natural rights, damage caused intentionally or through gross negligence, or the right of the weaker party to compensation for any damage.

In other words: such an agreement may have some significance in cases of property damage to land, but it cannot be interpreted as a universal “blank check” that absolves the forest owner of liability under all circumstances. For example, if the damage were caused by gross negligence, the situation would be assessed differently.

Damage Caused by a Tree: Who Is Liable?

Such agreements most often arise from concerns that a tree might fall from the forest onto a neighboring building, car, or fence. The Civil Code establishes a general duty of care: everyone must act in such a way as to prevent unjustified harm to the life, health, or property of others.

In the case of damage caused by an object, the person who was supposed to supervise the object—typically the owner—is liable for the damage; however, the owner may be relieved of liability if they prove that they did not neglect their duty of supervision. In the case of trees, this means in practice that the mere fact that a tree has fallen does not automatically imply liability on the part of the forest owner. What will be important is whether, for example, the tree was clearly diseased, damaged, or dangerous, and whether the owner could have reasonably identified and addressed the risk.

When building near a forest, it therefore pays to take a practical approach. The design can account for a greater distance from the trees, appropriate placement of the house on the lot, more durable fencing, or other access solutions. However, these issues should be addressed professionally and proportionately, not through an automatic requirement that the builder waive the right to compensation for damages in advance.

Similar requirements do not apply only to forests

The Ombudsman also pointed out that similar requirements may arise in other situations. For example, in protected mineral deposit areas, among owners of technical or transportation infrastructure, or among river basin administrators seeking to protect their property or operations.

The general rule is the same: a private-law agreement may be useful for clarifying relationships between owners, but it should not replace the legal basis for administrative proceedings. The authority must make decisions based on legal regulations and expert opinions, not on whether one party has agreed to the other party’s contractual terms.

It is therefore important for a builder to ask: Who is requesting this document from me, under which provision of the law, and what exactly is its purpose? A request from a private owner is not the same as a statutory requirement imposed by an authority.

Summary

It is possible to build near a forest, but a project within 30 meters of the forest edge requires an assessment by the state forestry authority. The builder must therefore expect a binding opinion or, as the case may be, a unified environmental opinion. This serves as the public-law basis for the authority’s decision.

An agreement with the forest owner to waive the right to compensation for damages is a separate matter. It may be relevant in private-law relationships, but it cannot be an automatic condition for the issuance of a building permit. The developer should sign it only if they understand its implications, especially if it is to be entered in the real estate cadastre.

If you are unsure whether a particular document is actually required for a building permit, contact the building authority or the relevant state forestry administration directly and ask for a clear explanation. For agreements waiving claims for damages, it is advisable to have the document reviewed by a lawyer before signing it.