Mr. sc. Ante Jelavić,dipl.iur.

MARITIME DOMAIN IN CROATIAN LEGISLATIVE

REZIME

U ovom radu autor razmatra pravnu problematiku pomorskog dobra, koji predstavlja bitan institut

pomorskog prava.

Pomorsko dobro definirano je Pomorskim zakonikom Republike Hrvatske i Zakonom o pomorskom

dobru i morskim lukama dio državnog teritorija na kopnu, unutarnje morske vode, teritorijalno more, njihovo

dno i morsko podzemlje te ima specifične geomorfološke i funkcionalne karakteristike koje treba utvrditi u

postupku određivanja granica pomorskog dobra. Određivanje granica pomorskog dobra predstavlja ključan

problem, budući da je Zakon o pomorskom dobru i morskim lukama ostavio široke mogućnosti širenja

pomorskog dobra na morsku obalu, uz ispunjenje određenih uvjeta. Pomorsko dobro jest dobro u općoj uporabi ,

namijenjeno upotrebi svih pravnih subjekata, no može se koristiti i u korist određenih pravnih subjekata kroz

institut koncesije. Postoje dvije vrste koncesija-koncesija za posebnu upotrebu i koncesija za ekonomsko

korištenje pomorskog dobra. Koncesija se može prenositi na drugu osobu, dati u zalog i potkoncesiju, te u

određenim slučajevima oduzeti i opozvati. Posebnu pažnju autor priklanja pravnom statusu građevina izgrađenih

na pomorskom dobru, kao i problemu pretvorbe i privatizacije na pomorskom dobru.

Ključne riječi : pomorsko dobro, koncesija, koncesijsko odobrenje, evidencija, pretvorba.

1. AN INTRODUCTION

Institute of maritime domain, its origin and characteristics are presented in this article.

This article is divided into three sections.

Section one defines the maritime domain as domain of special interest for Republic of

Croatia, in public use and it includes an internal sea, territorial sea, its bottom and

underground, part of mainland for public use or part of mainland that is declared to be of

such use, and also everything that is permanently attached to it on its surface of bellow. Thus,

maritime domain consists of three components: sea component, coastal component and

underwater component.

An exception to public use of maritime domain is an institute of concession.

Concession is a licence granted by the Government and given to legal entity or natural person

for performing certain services of other activities. It is usually given for a specified period of

time, and the decision about concession is brought by the Croatian Parliament on proposal of

the Government of Croatia. There are two types of concession: the concession for special use

and the concession for economic use. The terms of concession and it’s extend are regulated by

concession decision and concession agreement. It can be transferred to another person, it can

be given to sub-concession and it can be pawned or withdrawn, and this matter will be

discussed in section two.

Section three will be dedicated to the matter of rights in rem over maritime domain.

The rights of rem cannot be gained over maritime domain as for instance ownership rights,

pledge, etc. The status of the buildings built on the maritime domain for the purposes of

living, expropriation, conversion and privatization of the maritime domain will be discussed

in this section.

The Croatian version of this text is published in journal Naše more (Precious sea), Dubrovnik, No. 1-2, 2012. It

was categorised as review.

2

2. MARITIME DOMAIN – THE DEFINITION

To comprehend an institute of maritime domain, its origin and characteristics it is

necessary to define the term of maritime domain.

According to Maritime Domain and Seaports Act (Zakon o pomorskom dobru i

morskim lukama, Official Gazette1 , No. 158/03,100/04,141/06, 38/09), maritime domain

consists of an internal sea, territorial sea, their bottoms and undergrounds. Also, part of the

mainland that is used for public use, by its very nature or by declaration in that sense, and

everything permanently connected to this part of mainland weather on its surface or under it,

is included in maritime domain. Above mentioned parts of mainland are sea shore, harbours,

piers, shelf, reefs, burrs, beaches or strands, estuaries of the rivers that are sea – connected,

water ways that are sea – connected, and also natural abundances in the sea and sea

underground2 (article 3. of Maritime Domain And Seaports Act, Official Gazette, No.

158/03.100/04,141/06,38/09). Maritime domain consists of three components. The first is

water component – it includes an internal sea and territorial sea of Republic of Croatia. The

second component is an underwater component – it includes bottom and underground of

internal sea and finally we have coastal component. It includes part of the mainland used for

naval traffic or fishing, or generally other purposes related to the sea – use, and this part of

mainland has to be at least six meters wide from the line of the middle higher waters, from

where the sea coast stretches, all the way up to the line where the highest waves reach during

the storms3 (article 4. of Maritime Domain and Seaports Act, Official Gazette, No. 158/03,

100/04, 141/06, 38/09). Coastal component defines the border of the maritime domain looking

from the coast – side. Coastal area of Croatia includes 25763 km2 of mainland, and its length

is 5790 km; 1778 km of it is coastal line of the mainland, and the rest of the length of 4012

km is coastal line of islands4. Maritime domain is an old legal institute and it goes back to the

times of Roman Empire, when the seashore was defined as a good in public use, and in a time

of feudalism, it was a property of the feudal master and owner of the land that was positioned

on the shore. Kingdom of Yugoslavia has defined the maritime domain as “common or public

good” in its Directive on public maritime domain (Uredba o pomorskom javnom dobru). In

Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia maritime domain was defined by republic laws; the

Act Of Maritime And Aqua Domain, Harbours And Seaports of Socialist Republic of Croatia,

Official Gazette, No. 19/74, (Zakon o pomorskom i vodnom dobru, lukama i pristaništima

Socijalističke Republike Hrvatske), and the Act Of Maritime Domain of Socialist Republic of

Montenegro (Zakon o pomorskom dobru Socijalističke Republike Crne Gore) of year 1978.

Republic of Croatia defines the maritime domain in its Maritime Code (Pomorski zakonik) of

year 1994. and then later in a year 2003. Republic of Croatia came up with the Maritime

Domain and Seaports act. All of these laws have the same thing in common. They all define

the maritime domain as public (or common) domain of special interest for country, domain

under special protection of the country, and they also define that it is used under the terms

regulated by the law. The term of common domain or public domain means that maritime

domain cannot be under the ownership of an individual or legal entity, but it is a domain in a

common or public use.

1 Croatian original term for this gazette is Narodne novine. 2 For more details see: Ivo, Grabovac, Plovidbeno pravo Republike Hrvatske, Književni krug, Split 2003., 48. 3 For more details article 4. of Maritime domain and Seaports Act, related to the Petar, Simonetti, Stvarna prava

na pomorskom dobru i na zgradama koje su na njemu izgrađene, from collection of papers: Vinko, Hlača,

Pomorsko dobro.-društveni aspekti upotrebe i korištenja, Pravni fakultet Sveučilišta u Rijeci, Rijeka 1996., 136 4 For more details see: Ivo, Šimunović, Obalni prostor i pomorsko gospodarstvo, Zbornik radova Pomorskog

fakulteta u Rijeci, Vo. 2. Rijeka 1993., 34.

3

Two consequences come out of this: first, one is that maritime domain cannot be

object of gaining any rights in rem, and the second one is that Republic of Croatia administers

maritime domain and takes care of it directly or with assistance of the units of regional self –

government or units of local self – government.

2.1. Administering and maintenance of maritime domain

Administering is supporting, improving, and taking care about protection of maritime

domain in public use. Administering also includes the special use or economic use of

maritime domain based on the concession decision or concession agreement (art 10. of

Maritime Domain and Seaports Act-MDSA, Official Gazette, No.158/03,100/04, 141/06,

38/09).

Maintenance is taking certain measures in order to preserve the value of maritime

domain, and thus maritime domain itself, that is being registered according to the regulations

of registration of real properties5. Besides units of regional self – government, certain

authorisation regarding the maritime domain in a sense of maintenance, is also given to the

units of local self – government with new Maritime Domain and Seaports Act. This

authorisation is given to mentioned units regarding part of maritime domain in public use that

is on their territory. An author finds this regulation to be valid and straight because the units

of local self – government, i.e. districts and towns, must have certain authorities over the

maritime domain, instead of situation where such authorities are privilege of counties only.

An approval to such stand author finds in a fact that the units of local self – government are

more familiar with the condition and other questions regarding maritime domain on their

territory then the units of regional self – government. Furthermore, this is a way of achieving

decentralization, and also the way to unburden the counties. This is particularly important for

the counties that have more than half of its territory positioned on the sea (for instance County

of Istria or County of Split – Dalmatia), because these units, besides their common duties,

also have to secure and conduct registration of numerous maritime domains on their territory.

Administering of maritime domain is divided in two sub-categories; regular administering and

special administering. Regular administering is done according to an annual scheme and it

includes the care about protection and maintenance of maritime domain. Authorities in units

of local self – government are the ones that make this scheme and they have to do that till 1st

December of current year (art. 11, par. 3. MDSA , Official Gazette, No. 158/03, 100/04,

141/06, 38/09). Special administering includes damage recovery for damage that has

occurred during the extraordinary occasions on maritime domain outside of harbours, and also

making and conducting the proposals about borders of maritime domain6. Units of local self –

government, i.e. towns and districts are in charge of regular administering, and counties are in

charge of special administering. Resources for administering of maritime domain are; fees for

concession and fees for concession licence, fees that are being paid by the owners of the

sailing boats and yachts registered in the sailing boats register i.e. yachts register, for the use

of maritime domain, the compensations of damage that has occurred with pollution of the sea

bottom, and finally the means secured in budgets of the counties or towns/districts for

maritime domain on their territory (Article 11., par. 4 of MDSA, Official Gazette, No. 158/03,

100/04, 141/06, 38/09).

5 For more details see: Dragan, Bolanča, Novine Zakona o pomorskom dobru i morskim lukama, Zbornik radova

Pravnog fakulteta u Splitu (hereinafter: ZRPFS), 40., No.1-2. (69.-70), 2003., 176. 6 Vanja, Seršić, Pomorsko dobro i jedinice lokalne samouprave, paper from collection of papers Dragan,Bolanča

et alia, Pomorsko dobro, Inženjerski biro, Zagreb 2006., 295. in accordance with: Branko, Kundih, Hrvatsko

pomorsko dobro u teoriji i praksi, Rijeka 2005., 107.

4

All of these means are collected on the territories of the units of local self –

government, i.e. units of regional self – government.

2.2. The protection of maritime domain

Protection of maritime domain is secured with an order i.e. with using the maritime

domain in such manner that it is not endangered, polluted, and by inspectional and

administrative supervision in conducting the regulations about maritime domain7.

Regulations about environmental protection are used on protection of the maritime domain

from pollution, except pollution by floating objects and vessels.

In Republic of Croatia, according to Maritime Domain and Seaports Act, the units of local

and regional self – government are in charge for the protection of maritime domain. This

matter, besides the mentioned law, is regulated also by Declaration on environmental

protection in Republic of Croatia, Official Gazette, No. 34/92 (Deklaracija o zaštiti okoliša u

Republici Hrvatskoj). In the Head Three, article 4., paragraph 2, line 5. of Declaration it is

determined that for the purposes of conducting the rules of this declaration, special ministry

for environmental protection and physical planning will be established and it will be

connected to authorities in units of self – government.

Even though this ministry was established, its connection with the organs of the units

of local self – government has remained so far only law regulation with no practical use

whatsoever. Author finds that it is necessary to connect the Ministry with authorities in units

of local and regional self – government, since Republic of Croatia is maritime country at by

the regulations of the laws it is due to take care of its territory, thus it is due to take care of

maritime domain too. Through this connection, better protection would be reached more

easily, and thus an author proposes establishment of mixed commission for protection of

maritime domain. This commission would be gathered by the representatives of three above-

mentioned “bodies”.

2.3. Defining the borders of maritime domain

Defining the borders of maritime domain is a procedure of a special interest for

Republic of Croatia and it is an assumption for registration of maritime domain in real –

estates registers. Furthermore, construction of the complete system of conducting and

administering the coastal and sea resources of Republic of Croatia depends on procedure of

defining borders of maritime domain.

This procedure is conducted according to the rules of Maritime Domain and Seaports

Act and Directive about procedure of defining the maritime domain border- Directive (Uredba

o postupku utvrđivanja granice pomorskog dobra), Official Gazette, No. 8/04, 82/05. It is

conducted by Committee of Ministry for borders of maritime domain, positioned by

competent minister on proposal of three – member county committee for borders which is

established by country ruler8 (For more details see art 14. of Directive about the procedure of

giving concession upon the maritime domain, Official Gazette, No. 8/04, 82/05).

7 For more details see: Ivan Roso, Neki problemi upravljanja, održavanja i zaštite pomorskog dobra, ZRPFS,

Split br. 4 (64), 2001., 543. 8 Directive has regulated that the Committee consists of 7 members who are representatives of these bodies:

- -County governing body competent for Maritime Affairs (two members).

- -County governing body competent for physical planning and environmental protection Affairs.

- -State geodetic directorate – cadastre district office.

- -Harbour captaincy.

- -District court.

5

Jadranko Jug considers that this procedure is administrative procedure9. The author

agree with Jug and thinks that this administrative procedure because it meets all the criteria

set out a definition of administrative proceedings10. This procedure is taken up by

administrative body, in this case (Ministry) that applies substantive rules on some social

relation (maritime domain, in this case), bringing administrative acts defining the rights,

obligations and interests of subjects (maritime domain's user). Nor law nor mentioned

directive did regulate who can be member of committee; only thing regulated that is

composed of president and two members. Author finds that the members of county committee

have to be independent experts on maritime domain, named by competent authorities and

bodies of Ministry of that local or regional self – governed unit. That would also be the way

of reaching objectivity and competence while proposal of the maritime domain borders is

being made.

Directive about the procedure of defining the maritime domain borders (Uredba o

postupku utvrđivanja granice pomorskog dobra – the Directive), Official Gazette, No. 8/04,

82/05 indicates that the border of maritime domain comprehends an area that is used for

navigation and fishing on the sea, and for other purposes regarding the sea – exploitations,

according to the documents of physical planning (for more details see Directive, article 3.,

paragraph 3., line 2.).

The border of the maritime domain is defined by using the existing natural and legally

built artificial obstacles (natural mows, vegetation, plants, coastal walk – edges), (for more

details see Directive, art. 3., Official Gazette, No. 8/04, 82/05). If configuration of sea shore

does not change, maritimo line of cadastre changes will be used. Committee makes proposal

of the maritime domain border based on the Annual plan of administering, and just as an

exception, upon request and only if requested area is not under Annual plan of administering

over maritime domain.

Above mentioned request for determination of maritime domain border can be put by

the Government of Republic Croatia, over its Ministry of the sea, tourism, traffic and

development, then bodies of public administration and natural person or legal entities (art. 4.

paragraph 7. of Directive, Official Gazette, No. 8/04, 82/05). According to the practise so far,

requests have usually been directed towards couple of meters of coastal line. The procedure of

setting borders on maritime domain is slow and sluggish and this is a reason why this question

has never been completely arranged and confirmed in practise11. Together with demand, it is

necessary to attach the copy of cadastre plan of the area that needs to be border – defined, the

certificate of possession sheet and certificate of relevant documents about physical planning,

certificate of real – estates registers, geodetic shot of the area or digital ortophoto plan with

integrated copy of cadastre plan and proof about payment of the fees for defining maritime

domain borders (see art. 4. , par. 9. Directive , Official Gazette, No. 8/04, 82/05). Demand is

applied to Committee and it is due to check its status and completeness within 8 days. If

Committee finds that the demand is not complete, it will give dead line to the demander for

completing it. Mentioned dead line can not be shorter than 15 days. If the demand is

- -Local self – governing unit on whose area the borders of maritime domain are being defined

9 See: Jadranko, Jug, Pravni status općih dobara, from T., Josipović et alia, Nekretnine u pravnom prometu,

Inžinjerski biro, Zagreb 2004., 7 10The administrative procedure is a set of legal rules which regulate the mode of action of government

authorities, other government bodies and legal entities with public authority, as the body of the application of

substantive rules on specific social relation bring their administrative acts upon the rights, obligations or legal

interests of certain entities. See: art. 2. of Act of General Administrative Procedure, Official Gazette No. (47/09) 11 For more see: Boris, Fantulin, Utvrđivanje granica pomorskog dobra u okviru zakonskog dobra, in Branka,

Barišić- Marijan, Bitanga-Boris, Fantulin, et alia., Pomorsko dobro, Inženjerski biro, Zagreb 2006., 134.

6

complete, county committee is due to deliver the proposal of maritime domain border within

90 days (art. 5. of Directive, Official Gazette, No.8/04, 82/05 ) to the Committee of

Ministry12. An author finds that in order to raise an efficiency and speed of the procedure of

defining the maritime domain borders, some of these dead lines should be shorter. This

particularly refers to dead line for completing demand – 15 to 8 days; for delivering of the

borders – proposal to Committee of Ministry – 90 to 30 or 60 days top. According to

Directive, proposal of maritime domain border consists of textual part with explanation and

attachments. Textual part with explanation includes the inscriptions of the maritime domain

borders, data of eventually defined maritime domain border based on previous law

regulations, data about filling or erosion of the coast, data about configuration and existing

status of surrounding area, reasons that define the proposal of the border and data about

harmony among existing status in area and the status in the documents of physical planning

(art 7. of Directive, Official Gazette, No. 8/04, 82/05).

Border of maritime domain is concluded and defined by decision of Ministry

Committee, besides in a cases when border of harbour area is defined in a harbours opened for

public traffic. This decision includes the description of maritime domain border and list of

plots from real – estate registers and cadastres that are based on maritime domain whose

border is being defined (see art. 9. of Directive, Official Gazette, No. 8/04, 82/05).

Committee is due to deliver these decisions to the competent State bar for its

inscription in real – estate registers13. Against this decision, a party can appeal to Ministry

within 15 days.

3. CONCESSIONS AND CONCESSION APPROVAL ON MARITIME

DOMAIN

3.1. Concession- the definition and types

Concession is defined as a right to exclude completely of partially part of maritime

domain out of the public use, in order of giving it on special or economic use to legal entities

or natural persons who are registered for conducting the trade. Concession and concession approval are defined in the MDSA and Directive about the

procedure of giving concession on maritime domain- Directive about the procedure (Uredba o

postupku davanja koncesije na pomorskom dobru), (Official Gazette nr. 23/04, 101/04,

141/06, 38/09), and also in Concession Act (Zakon o koncesiji), (Official Gazette nr.125/08).

According to these laws, concession on maritime domain can be given only after the border of

maritime domain is defined and recorded in the real – estate registers (see art 7. of Maritime

Domain and Seaports Act, related to Directive about the procedure, art. 2.) However,

emerging question here is what happens if maritime domain is under the rights on rem and

other gained rights and thus it cannot be recorded into the real – estate registers? The

Maritime domain and Seaports Act does not give an answer to this question. Author finds that

in such case concession should not be given until existing status of maritime domain does not

get resolved. There are two types of concessions: concession for economic use of maritime

domain and concession for special use of maritime domain.

12 Vladušić finds this phase as pre-administrative procedure. See: J., Vladušić: Određivanje granica pomorskog

dobra, ZRPFS, 46, No.1 , 2009. , 229. 13 For more details see article 15. of Maritime Domain and Seaports Act, related to B, Fantulin, (2005.), 137.

7

3.1.1. Concession for economic use of maritime domain

Concession for economic use of maritime domain is used for conducting economic

activities and services with or without the use of existing buildings or other objects of

maritime domain14.

Concession for economic use of maritime domain is given by general rising of offer,

and the decision about rising of offer is brought by concession provider. In order

concessionaire would gain the right of concession he must be registered for performing

economic services for which the concession is given, he must have technical, organizational

and expert abilities for realization of concession, he must have guaranty for realization of the

concession plan and program, he must have all the obligations from previous concessions

annulated, and finally concession can not be taken away from him15.

Concession is given on certain period of time, and this period depends of purpose of

concession, its scale and volume, the need for investment and total economic results achieved

with such concession. Thus, concession for an economic use of maritime domain or building

of structures that are important for county is given by county government on the period of

20 years top, and previous procedure of giving concession is lead by competent county

administrative body (for more details see Maritime Domain and Seaports Act., article 20,

par. 2). Concession for an economic use of maritime domain which includes the building of

structures that are important for Republic of Croatia is given by Government of Republic

of Croatia on period of 50 years top, and previous procedure of giving concession is lead by

Ministry. Concession for building of new structures that are important for Republic of

Croatia, that demand significant investments, and economic results cannot be achieved

within 50 years, is given by the Government of Republic of Croatia on proposal of the

Parliament on period of 99 years16. After the decision about general rising of offer,

concession provider has a right of non – accepting all of incoming offers.

If concessions are related to an islands or areas that are considered to be islands in

accordance to the Islands Act (Zakon o otocima), an advantage for the offer has an applicant

whose registered office or place of residence is on island17. This solution is opposite to the

rule about the equal position of all before the law. The author thinks that residence of an

applicant cannot represent the only most important criteria for the concession on the islands.

The only criteria should be the financial viability offer. Nowadays many buildings and state-

owned companies, even islands are sold to foreigners. Accordingly, the author sees no reason

why a concession on the island could not get the person who does not reside on the island.

Then, the president of the competent body within 8 days period delivers the results and

opinion to the body competent for conducting the procedure, and this body is now due to

make a proposal of concession decision within further 8 days. Concession decision defines

the volume and the terms of special use. This decision includes: the area of maritime domain

that is given on special use or economic use, manner, terms and time of use or economic use

of maritime domain, degree of exclusion of public use upon maritime domain, concession

fees, list of an objects of sub – structure or super-structure on the maritime domain that are

14 For more see: Dragan, Bolanča, Osnovne značajke Zakona o pomorskom dobru i morskim lukama, Pomorsko

poredbeno pravo, god.43, No.158, Jadranski zavod, Zagreb 2004., 13 15 For more see: art.17-22. of Directive in according with Dragan, Bolanča:Pomorsko dobro i

koncesije,Pomorsko dobro,Zagreb,2005.,129. 16 For more see: D., Bolanča, .(2004.), 17. 17 This solution is opposite to the rule about the equal position of all before the law. For more details see Vanja,

Seršić, Koncesijsko odobrenje i načelo tržišnog natjecanja, Aktualnosti hrvatskog zakonodavstva i pravne

prakse, Godišnjak 12, Organizator, Zagreb 2005b., 555

8

also given to concession, and finally rights and obligations of concession provider and

concessionaire (art 24. of MDSA, Official Gazette, No. 158/03, 100/04, 141/06, 38/09).

Concession decision is based on the results and opinion of competent body and it

presents the assumption to conclude the concession agreement that defines the concession

more closely. It defines the purposes of concession, terms that have to be fulfilled by

concessionaire, way of paying the fees and compensations for concession and their height,

and also the guarantees of concessionaire (art. 25. paragraph 2. of Maritime Domain and

Seaports Act, Official Gazette,No. 158/03, 100/04, 141/06, 38/09). If concessionaire does not

conclude concession agreement within certain period of time, concession will be taken away

from him. Author finds this regulation justifying and righteous because if concessionaire does

not conclude this agreement it means that he is no longer interested in concession.

Concessionaire is due to pay annual fee that consists of permanent and changeable part, and

the height of fee is defined according to the economic justifiability and profitability of using

the maritime domain18.

3.1.2. Concession for special use of maritime domain

Concession for special use partially or completely excludes public use of maritime

domain for a purpose of conducting special use. This special use includes building of the

different structures on maritime domain for religious needs of community, cultural purposes,

welfare and education, science, sport, humanitarian activities, and building of various

structures for military purposes, internal affair purposes, ect19.

Specific characteristic of this concession lies in a fact that the right of economic use of

maritime domain can not be transferred on concessionaire with it. This concession is also used

for a specified period of time, and that period is defined with Directive about the procedure of

giving concession on maritime domain- Directive about the procedure (Uredba o postupku

davanja koncesije na pomorskom dobru), Official Gazette, No. 23/04, 101/04. For concession

on the objects of state importance, the period is up to 99 years and the concession granter is

Government of Republic of Croatia. For concession on objects of county importance the

period is up to 20 years, and the concession granter is County head20. Finally, concession on

the objects of local importance is given on period of up to 20 years, and the concession

granter is town head or mayor (art. 24. Directive about the procedure, Official Gazette, No.

23/04, 101/04). Concession for special use is given upon the written demand applied to the

competent body. The demand contains the name, surname, business name and place of

registered office of the applicant, the statement about the purpose of special use of maritime

domain together with the concept design, declaration of competent body for physical planning

about the importance of domain that is demanded to be put in special use, and also declaration

about harmony of concept design of use with physical – planning documentation, and finally

the proof about registration of legal entity (art. 25. of Directive about the procedure, Official

Gazette, No. 23/04, 101/04). The procedure of giving concession for special use is identical to

the procedure of giving concession for an economic use of maritime domain. Only difference

is that applicant of concession for special use has to, among other things, apply for another

demand – the demand for issuing the building licence (in a case of building on maritime

18 See more: D., Bolanča, (2005), 133-135. 19 B., Kundih, (2005) 161. 20 Split-Dalmatian County committee gave concession for the purpose of using special purpose ports -

on the part of Donja Podstrana, district Strožanac to sporting society Strožanac. The decision is founded in

Official Journal of Split-Dalmatian County, No 1/2007.

9

domain), and compliance of captaincy on concept project that is given on behalf of safety of

the navigation, because otherwise concession licence would be taken away21.

County government of Istria has given the concession of a maritime domain in a bay

called Pješčana uvala near Pula for a period of 20 years to Sport Angling Society Pješčana

uvala. This case is doubtful and controversial because concession was given without the

previous defining and registering of martitime domain boundaries. This decision has been

cancelled by Ministry of Maritime Affairs, Transport and Infrastructure22. Author finds that

concession should not have been given until the questions regarding borders of maritime

domain were resolved. Previous defining and registering of maritime domain must be realized

before the giving of concession of maritime domain. Otherwise concession could be given in

an area that is not a maritime domain. So for that reason, author finds decision of Ministry

justified.

3.2. Concessional approval

Concessional approval is legal institute given on demand of natural person or legal

entity that is registered for practising and conducting various services or businesses on

maritime domain that nor exclude nor limit the use of maritime domain23. Concessional

approval is given by Council for concession approvals and it consists of five members, it is

established for every town or district, and it is also given by public authority that

administers the protected area with the agreement of Ministry for environmental

protection, physical planning and building, if approval or concession is related to

conducting certain activities on protected areas ( article 39., par. 2-5 of MDSA). Composition

of the council for concession approvals is determined in article 7. of Directive24. Author finds

that three representatives of units of local self – government in Council should be experts on

maritime law in order of reaching objectivity in decisions made by council. Reason for

establishing this institute is maintenance and protection of maritime domain and gaining profit

for local and regional units and the whole country. Constitutional approval is given for

conducting the services on sea shore, internal seas and territorial sea of Republic of Croatia,

upon immovable cultural domain and exclusively on demand of applicant unless it comes up

to conducting services on protected areas and immovable cultural good. In this case

approval can only be obtained by general rising of the offer (art. 14. par. of Directive about

the procedure, Official Gazette, No. 23/04, 101/04). Mentioned demand has to be in harmony

with an annual plan of administering of maritime domain, it has to have already mentioned

agreement of port policy, and certificate of competent county body about micro location on

maritime domain25. Concession approval, as well as concession, can only be given to legal

entities and natural person registered for conducting the trade (art. 38., par. 1. of MDSA,

Official Gazette, No. 158/03, 101/04, 141/06, 38/09). Author agrees with this regulation

completely because concessional licence is given exclusively for conducting certain services

and thus it only can be given to the subjects that are involved with these activities and not any

21 See: B, Kundih, (2005) .163. 22 For more see: Bojan, Žižović, Sportska lučića u Pješčanoj uvali nelegalna, Glas Istre, Pula edition from 10TH

January 2013. year, 15. 23 For more see: Goran,Vojković, Pomorsko dobro i koncesije, Hrvatski hidrografski institut, Split 2003., 190. 24 Council for concession approval is composed of:

- Representative of town/district upon which area the council is being established (three

representatives).

- Physical Planning Expert named from body competent for releasing the documents.

- Financial expert- Representative of Ministry of Finance-competent Tax administration. 25 See:V., Seršić, (2005b)., 557.

10

legal entities or any natural person, as it used to be practise in ex Maritime Code (Pomorski

zakonik). Concession approval is given on period of 1 year up to 5 years. Period that is

shorter and related to days, not years, is given for activities regarding cultural, sport,

entertainment and commercial shows, and for recording commercial programs or advertising

(art 9. of Directive about the procedure, Official Gazette, No.23/04, 101/04). Concession

approval for economic use of natural goods and conducting other activities on protected areas

is given on period of up to 3 years, and for conducting activities on immovable cultural

goods on period of up to one year. According to ex Maritime Code (Pomorski zakonik),

concession approval was given on period of one year top. The MDSA regulates another new

possibility; possibility of appealing against the decision on concession approval to competent

Ministry26. This emphasizes that decision on concession approval is administrative act by its

nature27.

Activities that can be conducted based on concession approval exclusively on sea

shore and territorial sea are: transportation of passengers with vessel, ship or submarine,

renting the floating vessels, transportation of the cargo, sea – cleaning and technical labours,

and transportation of passengers, cargo and items. Activities that can be done on sea shore

are: renting of the means, catering trade and commercially – recreational activities28.

Activities that are conducted on bases of concession approval are ought to be conducted

forbearingly without endangerment of other subjects during the use of maritime domain. For

instance, renting of the sea-scooters or jet-skies can not be done on the part of maritime

domain that is meant to be used exclusively for swimming.

3.2.1. Transfer of concession and sub-concession

Concession can be transferred by written and explained transfer proposal completely

on another person under the same terms, with the agreement of concession provider29.

Authorised concessionaire of concession for economic use can assign performing of

certain side – activities that are being performed in minor volume, to other legal entities or

natural persons with permission of concession provider. These persons or entities have to use

maritime domain according to the terms of concession (art. 26. of Maritime Domain And

Seaports Act, Official Gazette, No. 158/03 100/04, 141/06 38/09). If these persons would not

respect the terms of the concession, it would, in the author's view, constituted a valid reason

for termination of the concession.

Concessionaire can give explained proposal to the concession provider regarding

sub-concession to another natural person of legal entity if he (concessionaire) is not capable

26 Differences between ex and new Maritime code are enumerated in:Dragan, Bolanča, 2004., 25. 27 Decision on concession approval completely preforming condition mentioned in definition of administrative

act:

- act of state organ or of organization,

- it is reached in performing public authorities,

- it decides about definite rights or obligations of individual or administrative organization.

For more see: Ivo,Borković, Upravno pravo, Seventh Edition, Narodne novine (Official Gazette), Zagreb 2002,

363. 28 For more see: V., Seršić, Koncesijsko odobrenje kao instrument gospodarskog iskorištavanja dobara s

posebnim osvrtom na pomorsko dobro, from D., Bolanča et alia, Pomorsko dobro, Inž. Biro, Zagreb 2005., 58.-

63. 29D, Bolanča, (2004)., 20. The Croatian Government has give a consent to the transfer of the concession of the

maritime domain for the purpose of commercial use to carry out activities in the Bay of Mali Ston to the Mussels

Crafts Pesej. For more see: Official Gazette, No (106/2012).

11

of fulfilling his obligations from concession agreement, or if he finds that conducting the

activities under concession would be more efficient if assigned to another person or entity in

sub – concession30 (art. 4.-6. of Directive about the procedure of giving concession upon the

maritime domain, Official Gazette, No. 23/04, 101/04).

Concession provider is due to give his permission to the proposal or to refuse it in a

period of 30 days counting from the day of receiving proposal, and if he gives his permission,

he is due to make new concession agreement with authorized concessionaire.

3.2.2. Revocation of concession

Concession can be withdrawn by concession provider at any time, or partially when

Croatian Parliament finds that such withdrawn is in interests of Republic of Croatia (art. 29.,

par.1. of MDSA, Official Gazzette, No. 158/03, 100/04, 141/06, 38/09). Author finds this

regulation unacceptable because it allows very wide spectra of reasons for withdrawing it any

time of for any reason. Though some authors, for instance dr.sc. Goran Vojković, consider

that concession should be withdrawn only at exceptional cases; for instance war or direct

endangerment of independence, uniqueness and survival of Republic of Croatia (art. 99.-100.

of Constitution of Republic of Croatia, Official Gazette, No. 44/01,55/01).

Author finds that the law should define the cases that are important for interests of

Republic of Croatia and when concession could be withdrawn. Author claims that this would

help to raise the levels of legal security. An authorized concessionaire who has built certain

structures on maritime domain in case of withdrawal has a right on compensation of the

expenses depending on the period of time that he was not able to use concession (art 29., par

2. of MDSA, Official Gazette, No. 158/03,100/04,141/06,38/09).

3.2.3. Concession renunciation

Authorized concessionaire can abdicate concession. Appropriate name for a

renunciation of the concession would be concession abandon, because in this case,

authorized concessionaire is giving up from the concession and he will not the authorised

concessionaire anymore.

In a case of partial renunciation, it can be done in a period of 30 days from the day of

receiving the statement about partial renunciation (art. 29. of Maritime Domain and Seaports

Act, Official Gazette, No. 158/03,100/04,141/06, 38/09). Author thinks that this statement

should be irrevocable and certified by a notary public. An example of this is renunciation of

concession for using prefabricated pier on the coats of the island Bodulaš (Municipality of

Medulin), done by Davor Buršić and Kristian Šebelić31.

3.2.4. Withdrawal of concession

Concession is subtracted in following cases: if authorized concessionaire does not

build structures or other objects for which the concession was given in a certain period of

time, if he does not comply to the law regulations and other rules or if he does not follow the

terms of concession, if he does not use concession at all, or if he does not use it in a purposes

it was given for, or if he uses it over the limits regulated by concession agreement, if he

30 The Croatian Government has give a consent to giving in sub-concession upon the part of maritime domain of

Kraljevica port to the Shipyard Kraljevica at August of 2008. 31 The decision is situated in http://www.istra-istria.hr/ fileadmin/ dokumenti/…85-10.doc:,taken from1 June

2013.

12

performs an actions on maritime domain that are not mentioned in a concession or are

opposite to the approved project without permission, if he does not pay regularly the

concession fees32 and finally if he does not protect and maintenance maritime domain on a

way regulated in concession agreement ( art 30. par.1. of Maritime Domain and Seaports Act,

Official Gazette, No. 158/03,100/04,141/06,38/09). A decision regarding subtraction of

concession is brought by concession provider and he is due to ask the concessionaire to reply

on the reasons for subtraction of concession within specified period of time (articles 9.-10.

Directive about the procedure of giving concession upon the maritime domain, Official

Gazette, No. 23/04, 101/04). Author finds that this period for reply of concessionaire should

be minimum 8 days and up to 15 days top because this would speed up the procedure of

subtraction and it would save the time. Then, the concession agreement is terminated, and

concessionaire has not a right of compensation of the damage because of agreement

termination.

3.2.5. Ending of concession

Concession ends in these cases: expiration, abdication of the concessionaire, death of

concessionaire i.e. by end of existence of legal entity if successors within 6 months counting

from the day of death or end of existence do not ask confirmation of concession, subtraction

of concession and finally agreement about termination of the concession33(art. 30, par.1. of

Maritime Domain and Seaports Act). Concessionaire does not have a right of compensation in

this case, but he has a right of taking away the structures he has built unless they are

permanently attached to maritime domain, and if it is possible by very nature without causing

damage on maritime domain34. If such removal of structures is not possible, structures will

become belonging of maritime domain according to article 33. of Maritime Domain and

Seaports Act. The laws say nothing about the compensation of damage to the concessionaire

in a case of end of concession. Author finds that concessionaire should have such

compensation of damage in cases of ending of concession for a reason of expiration or mutual

agreement about termination of concession, if concessionaire is not the one to be blamed for

termination.

3.2.6. Concession disputes

All of the questions regarding giving concession, performing it, subtraction or

changing of concession (concession disputes) are under jurisdiction of competent Ministry35.

Many legal experts do not agree to the mentioned rule. Author of this article also finds this

rule unacceptable because Ministry is not competent for giving, or for subtraction of

concession, and thus it should not be competent over concession disputes. Author finds that

for economic reasons and objectivity reasons, these disputes should be given to special

arbitral tribunals for maritime affairs, and the disputes and pleas should be lead and decided

by experts in maritime law. Some authors, for instance Vojković, consider that commercial

32 So for that reason Croatian Government has taken up the concession on the maritime domain for the purpose

of commercial use-industrial port Dugi Rat to the factory Dalmacija Dugi rat in 2003 year. For more see:

Official Gazette, (10/2003) 33 See art. 31-33. of Maritime Domain and Seaports Act, nr.(158/03,100/04,141/06,38/09)) in accordance with

Nina, Perko, Slučajevi nezakonitog korištenja koncesije na pomorskom dobru i posljedice takvog postupanja,

from journal of papers Branka, Barišić. et alia, Pomorsko dobro, Inženjerski biro, Zagreb 2006. 36. 34 N, Perko, ibid., 38. 35 Many legal experts do not agree to the mentioned rule. For more see: Mihajlo, Dika, Osvrt na rješavanje

sporova u vezi s koncesijama na pomorskome dobru, from collection of papers Vinko, Hlača: Pomorsko dobro i

koncesije, Pravni fakultet u Rijeci, Rijeka 2005., 39-42.

13

courts ought to have jurisdiction in these disputes36. Author is opposed to this opinion because

he thinks that disputes would be resolved more efficiently before an arbitrage rather than

courts. It is not possible to appeal to the decision of Ministry, but administrative dispute can

be initiated.

4. PROPERTY-LEGAL ISSUES REGARDING MARITIME DOMAIN

4.1. Gaining of rights in rem and expropriation procedure

Maritime domain, according to the Maritime Domain and Seaports Act, can not be an

object of gaining ownership or other rights in rem on no bases.

There used to be a possibility of gaining ownership over maritime domain (up to year

1974.) and mostly on buildings built on maritime domain with purpose of living in it. Thanks

to this law solution, numerous buildings and houses were built on Croatian coast for living.

Status of these buildings has been defined by Maritime Domain and Seaports Act. Existing

buildings built o maritime domain that are gained or built upon proper legal bases (built till

the year 1974.) shall be given to special use for all the time that they are used in a purpose of

living without paying fees or compensations, and user of the building is due to demand

concession. If part of that building is used for economic activities, user is due to demand

concession for economic use37 ( art. 118., of Maritime Domain and Seaports Act, Official

Gazette, No. 158/03, 101/04, 141/06, 38/09). The law never mentioned the term owner, only

user, and this user becomes concessionaire due to pay a fees for concession with upcoming of

this law. Author finds this rule illogical because if someone has built certain structures or

buildings with proper and valid legal bases he can only be owner, not user. Owner and user

can never be synonyms, since the right of use is only one of more owner’s mandates looking

way back to the Roman Empire laws. Author finds that a status of existing structure that is

gained by valid legal base and if built legitimate complying to the positive regulations and

laws, should not be changed. An authority that administers the existing structure that is

positioned on national park or special reservation is due to demand concession for special use.

Croatian Supreme Court says: Buildings and structures built on maritime domain are

belonging to the maritime domain. Explanation of this verdict said: Maritime code, as lex

specialis, does not require that buildings and structures that are built on the maritime

domain, either on the basis of the concession or on the right to build, legally, are not part of

maritime domain ( Croatian Supreme Court, GZZ 131/03 of 2nd July of 2003).

Maritime domain is considered to be protected area and upon it the procedure of

expropriation can be conducted – procedure of limitation and regaining of ownership with

compensation of market value of real estate. Market value is value that can be achieved on

market in ratio of market supply and demand in time of its determination38. The term

expropriation on maritime domain is especially actual in current process of privatization of

Croatian shipyards because some of them, for instance Brodosplit and Brodotrogir are

completely on maritime domain. The solution was found in decision made by the Government

to stop the privatization procedures until shipyards don’t get proper compensation.

Expropriation on maritime domain is conducted in a manner that former owner gets to be

36 G, Vojković, (2003.), 186. 37 Dragan, Bolanča, Stvarna prava na pomorskom dobru, Aktualnosti hrvatskog zakonodavstva i pravne

prakse,Yearbook 13, Organizator, Zagreb 2006., 77.-78. 38 For more see:, Desanka, Sarvan, Pravni status nekretnina u zaštićenim područjima, Aktualnosti hrvatskog

zakonodavstva i pravne prakse, Godišnjak 12, Informator, Zagreb 2006.,545.-546.

14

concessionaire without paying fees till the amount of determined fees for concession does not

reach the amount of proper compensation for expropriated property. Author finds this

regulation unintelligible because it is impossible to connect expropriation and concession.

Concession that is given is in this case unilateral legal action, and it can not be named

concession because concession is formed by bilateral agreement and declaration of will done

by two parties. Expropriation could be done also in a manner that former owner receives real

estate on some other area that is not maritime domain. Right of ownership on maritime

domain can be recognized only at object which authorized concessionaire built on maritime

domain during the concession. This opinion is made from attitude of Act about ownership and

other rights in rem –Act about Ownership, Official Gazette, No. 91/96, 68/98,137/99,

22/00,73/00, 114/01, 79/06, 141/06. This Act defines that objects built on maritime domain on

the basis of concession are not their component part. Maritime domain can not be an object of

gaining ownership or other rights in rem on no bases, even according to the old Austro-

Hungarian Allgemeine Grundgesetz Buch. There was a plea at Municipal Court in Šibenik

where the plaintiff sued Republic of Croatia for determination of ownership on real estate.

Mentioned real estate is situated on seacoast and represents a public domain in general use.

Plaintiff said that his father has been possessor of dispute land until 1950s. His plea was

rejected since it was determined that this real estate is in a zone of maritime domain. Because

of its position, these real estates cannot be an object of gaining ownership rights to any legal

rules (Croatian Supreme Court, Rev 17/97, 9th October 1997).

To the status of ownership on real estate that used to be on maritime domain and it is

no longer there the Maritime Domain and Seaports Act does not give any thoughts. Opinion

of State bar is that this real estate becomes the property of Republic of Croatia. This opinion

is corroborated by the attitude that Republic of Croatia is the one in charge of administering

over maritime domain, thus by the system of automatism it becomes the owner of such real

estate, and also an institute of appropriation- i.e. taking the property of someone else, or

common property on territory of Republic of Croatia that does not have known owner39(art

362. par. 2. Act About Ownership, Official Gazette, No. 91/96, 68/98,137/99, 22/00, 73/00,

114/01, 79/06, 141/06). Author agrees to this opinion completely.

4.2. Conversion and privatization of maritime domain

Conversion is a procedure of reshaping of the firm that is in common ownership into

the firm that has a specified owner40.

In nineties of XX century, or the first years of Croatian independence, conversion and

privatization of many social firms took place and some of these firms had their objects on

maritime domain. These objects were considered as basic mean in their asset, i.e. a property

that has been given to them for use. An Act About Conversion And Privatization (Zakon o

pretvorbi i privatizaciji) did not mention a thing about whether these real estates are part of

founding capital of firm, but Croatian privatization fond (hereinafter: Fond) excluded the real

estates from estimation of founding capital of the firm, and value of these objects was

included in estimation of investment in maritime domain41. The only condition for conversion

was that the specified object was capable of being under ownership, that the right that is about

to be converted is gained on proper legal basis with fulfilment of all of the presumptions that

were necessary for gaining of that right at that very moment, and finally that the current

39 S, Frković,. (2005.),. 191. 40See: Hrvoje, Kačer, Reafirmacija prava vlasništva na nekretninama u hrvatskom pravu, Zbornik radova

Pravnog fakulteta u Splitu, god. 40, No. 1-2. (69-70),2003., 37. 41 Julia, Vladušić, Evidentiranje pomorskog dobra u hrvatskom pravu, own edition, Split, 2008, 126.

15

conversion was not defined by some other special laws42. After finalizing conversion process,

new firms have put up the proposals for registration of their ownership over the real estates.

However, Fond would release the decision about concordance to conversion, and this decision

never included the list of real estates that were included in value of founding capital of the

firm, only the total value of capital, number and nominal value of stocks and thus it was not

convenient and appropriate for registration of rights on real estates. Reason for this was that

the firms were obliged to deliver the proof about the right of use on real estates together with

their demands, and after that, the Fond was allowed to determine whether some real estate is

part of founding capital of the firm or not by discretion. Fond even came up with the rule that

it is not necessary to demand the confirmation that shows whether certain real estate enters the

founding capital or not, and this caused the deception of numerous capital societies since in a

moment of finding out about that information all of the time-limits have already passed so it

was not possible to initiate administrative dispute43. In some cases of registration of rights,

courts registered only the change of the name of legal entities and the right of use over real

estate would remain registered, whilst the other registered their status changes and the right of

ownership instead the right of use. This lead to the big chaos in real estate registers44.

An example for this is Split firm Dalmacijavino that is completely positioned on

maritime domain, and its privatization was conducted despite the fact that Croatian fond of

privatization and vice-president of Government were familiar with opinion of Snježana

Frković, deputy of State bar who warned that Dalmacijavino does not have any rights over

objects on maritime domain, and also does not have a right of invest – compensation and that

it is vital to deal the possible controversies over these problems before the selling takes place.

However, opinion of State bar was not obligate for Fond, and author finds this odd because if

the opinion of State bar is not obligate then what is its purpose at all. This rule is by opinion

of author the basic ground for illegal privatization of Dalmacijavino which firm is today in a

really bad shape. It is absurd that in the action Mali maestro where businessman Svjetlan

Stanić and vice president of Fond Ivan Gotovac, among other things were sued for selling of

Dalmacijavino, both of them were released of the guilt45. The only law that was an attempt

thought late one, to remove the negative consequences of privatization was an Act About

Ownership in its edition of 2006. in art 39a (Official Gazette, No.79/06.). Author finds

interesting decision of County Court in Split about privatization of one touristic company

from Split which says: Right of use and dispose of property which are unable to be subject

property will exceed such proprietary rights in the assets of the legal successor of the socio-

legal person. These rights can not be converted into the right to ownership of the land. Such

property rights stop privatization of the Company which had previously belonged to (Split

County Court, Gž-3249/06 of 3rd January 2007 year). That rights cannot be converted into

the right of ownership of the land, because in case of conversion, that rights end.

Author finds this verdict righteous because it has shown that the conduction and

privatization of social firm was illegal. This verdict is partially based on article 1038. of

Maritime Code (Pomorski zakonik) and by author’s opinion it should be ground base for other

verdicts that should prove the illegitimacy of conversion and privatization.

42 Mladen, Žuvela, Jadranko, Crnić, Pretvorba, privatizacija, denacionalizacija-pravni status neobuhvaćenih

odnosno neprocijenjenih nekretnina-primjena čl. 47. Zakona o privatizaciji, Pravo i porezi, Zagreb No. 3., 2001.,

17 43 Hrvoje, Kačer,. Reafirmacija prava vlasništva na nekretninama u hrvatskom pravu,, ZRPFS, Year 40, No.1-2,

2003., 42. 44 Dubravka,Vukmanović, Pretvorba i privatizacija na pomorskom dobru, Pomorsko dobro, Inženjerski biro,

Zagreb 2005., 120-124. 45 For more see: Sanja, Stapić, Dalmacijavino duguje 683 milijuna kuna, Slobodna Dalmacija, edition of 19.

December 2006.

16

5. THE CONCLUSION

Maritime domain is a domain of special interest for Republic of Croatia; it is

administered and protected by Republic of Croatia directly of through the units of local and

regional self – government.

Administering can be regular or special. Special jurisdiction is under jurisdiction of

the counties. Author finds that this should be under jurisdiction of unit of local self –

government for the domains that are based on its territory. Protection of maritime domain of

pollution is determined in Declaration about environmental protection. Procedure of

determination of the borders of maritime domain is done by special committee for making

proposal of the border but it does not decide about it; Ministry Committee does. This is not

logical and on the other hand it is opposed to the an Administrative Procedure Act (Zakon o

upravnom postupku) in a sense that one procedure is being lead by two different and

separated authorities. Author finds that only one authority – county committee should lead

this procedure and come up with adequate decisions. Furthermore, concerning the case of so

called undisputable maritime domain, the registration of maritime domain without

determination of borders should be legalized, and the registration of rights on rem should be

prohibited at the same time. Procedure of expropriation can be done upon maritime domain,

and the result of it is that expropriator gets the possession of real estate with compensation of

market value to the former owner. Expropriator is Republic of Croatia and the counties should

be too if expropriation is done for a reason of building the harbour of county importance.

According to the Maritime domain and Seaports Act, existing buildings for living built of

legitimate legal bases on maritime domain shall be given to free special use, and the user of

such structure is due to demand concession for using it.

Mentioned rule does not make too much sense because no one would normally give up on

the ownership to have a right of use. Also the term legitimate legal base is used, but this term

was never defined in laws, thus it should get defined.

ABSTRACT

In this article an author presented the legal problems of maritime domain that represents an important

institute of maritime law. Maritime domain is defined by Croatian Maritime Code and the Maritime Domain and

Seaports Act as ˝part of the national territory on land, internal waters, its bed and subsoil, and has specifically

geomorphological and functional characteristics to bed determined in the process of determining the maritime

domain borders.˝ Determination of maritime boundaries represents crucial problem, because the Maritime

Domain and Seaports Act left wide possibilities of expanding the maritime coast, under certain conditions. The

maritime domain is governed, maintained and protected by Republic of Croatia directly or through its counties

and districts/towns. Maritime domain is common good in public use, but in can be also used in favour of certain

legal subjects-institute of concession.

Special attention is adhered to the status of buildings constructed in the maritime domain, as well as the

issue of privatization in the maritime domain. Key words: maritime domain, concession, registration, property, privatization

17

6. THE LITERATURE

a) Books:

BARIŠIĆ, Branka -BITANGA, Marijan- FANTULIN, Boris-

FRKOVIĆ, Snježana – JUG, Jadranko- LAMBAŠA, Draško- NAKIĆ,

Jakob- PAVLOVIĆ, Šime- PERKO, Nina- PUH, Aleksandar- SERŠIĆ,

Vanja: Pomorsko dobro, Inženjerski biro, Zagreb, 2006.

BOLANČA,Dragan-DELAČ,Damir-FRKOVIĆ,Snježana-JUG,

Jadranko-KUNDIH,Branko-NAKIĆ,Jakob-SERŠIĆ,Vanja-

VUKMANOVIĆ,Dubravka: Pomorsko dobro, Inženjerski biro,

Zagreb, 2005.

BORKOVIĆ, Ivo: Upravno pravo, 7. izmijenjeno i dopunjeno

izdanje,NN, Zagreb, 2002

GRABOVAC, Ivo: Plovidbeno pravo Republike Hrvatske, Književni

krug, Split,2003.

HLAČA, Vinko: Pomorsko dobro-društveni aspekti upotrebe i korištenja,

Pravni fakultet Sveučilišta u Rijeci, Rijeka, 1996.

HLAČA, Vinko: Pomorsko dobro i koncesije, Pravni fakultet

Sveučilišta u Rijeci,Rijeka,1995.

JOSIPOVIĆ, Tatjana-BREŽANSKI, Jasna- SESSA, Đuro- CRNIĆ,

Jadranko- ANTOLIĆ, Ljiljana-BIENENFELD, Josip- FRKOVIĆ,

Snježana- JELČIĆ, Olga- KONČIĆ, Ana-Marija- JUG, Jadranko:

Nekretnine u pravnom prometu, Inžinjerski biro, Zagreb, 2004.

KUNDIH, Branko: Hrvatsko pomorsko dobro u teoriji i praksi,Hrvatski

hidrografski institut, Rijeka,2005.

VLADUŠIĆ, Julia: Evidentiranje pomorskog dobra u hrvatskom pravu,

(mag.rad), Split, vlast. naklada, 2008.

VOJKOVIĆ, Goran: Pomorsko dobro i koncesije, Hrvatski hidrografski

institut, Split,2003.

b) Experts articles:

BITANGA, Marijan: Pomorsko dobro kroz praksu Općinskog suda u

Zadru,referat from collection of papers Barišić,B i dr: Pomorsko dobro,

Inženjerski biro,Zagreb,2006.

BOLANČA, Dragan: Stvarna prava na pomorskom dobru, Aktualnosti

hrvatskog zakonodavstva i pravne prakse, Godišnjak 13, Organizator,

Zagreb,2006.

BOLANČA, Dragan: Novine Zakona o pomorskom dobru i morskim

lukama, Zbornik radova Pravnog fakulteta u Splitu,god.40, br.1-2.(69.-

70),2003.

BOLANČA, Dragan: Osnovne značajke Zakona o pomorskom dobru i

morskim lukama iz 2003. godine, Poredbeno pomorsko pravo,

Zagreb,god.43.,br.158,2004.

BOLANČA, Dragan: Pomorsko dobro i koncesije, paper from collection

of papers: Bolanča i dr.: Pomorsko dobro, Inženjerski biro,

Zagreb,2005.

18

DIKA, Mihajlo: Osvrt na rješavanje sporova u vzi s koncesijama na

pomorskome dobru, from collection of papers Hlača, Vinko: Pomorsko

dobro i koncesije, Pravni fakultet u Rijeci, Rijeka,2005.

FANTULIN, Boris: Utvrđivanje granica pomorskog dobra u okviru

zakonske definicije, from collection of papers Barišić i dr.: Pomorsko

dobro, Inženjerski biro, Zagreb,2006.

FRKOVIĆ, Snježana: Pomorsko dobro i praksa sudova te uloga države i

državnog odvjetništva, from collection of papers Barišić i dr.: Pomorsko

dobro, Inženjerski biro, Zagreb,2006.

JUG, Jadranko: Pravni status općih dobara, from collection of papers

JOSIPOVIĆ, Tatjana-BREŽANSKI, Jasna- SESSA, Đuro- CRNIĆ,

Jadranko- ANTOLIĆ, Ljiljana-BIENENFELD, Josip- FRKOVIĆ,

Snježana- JELČIĆ, Olga- KONČIĆ, Ana-Marija- JUG, Jadranko:

Nekretnine u pravnom prometu, Inžinjerski biro, Zagreb, 2004.

KAČER, Hrvoje: Reafirmacija prava vlasništva na nekretninama u

hrvatskom pravu, Zbornik radova Pravnog fakulteta u Splitu,

god.40,br.1-2.(69-70),2003.

LAMBAŠA, Draško: Poništenje pretvorbe "Luke Rijeka" , Pravo i

porezi, br.3.,2001.

LULIĆ, Nikolina: Morsko hlađenje Marjana, Sl.Dalmacija, izdanje od

16.7. 2009.

NAKIĆ, Jakob: Učiniti vidljivim status pomorskog dobra u zemljišnoj

knjizi, Aktualnosti hrvatskog zakonodavstva i pravne prakse,

Godišnjak 13, Organizator, Zagreb,2006.

PAVLOVIĆ, Šime: Zaštita pomorskog dobra u kaznenom i prekršajnom

pravu, from collection of papers Barišić i dr.: Pomorsko dobro,

Inženjerski biro, Zagreb,2006.

PERKO, Nina: Slučajevi nezakonitog korištenja koncesije na

pomorskom dobru i posljedice takvog postupanja, from collection of

papers: Barišić, B. I dr.: Pomorsko dobro, Inženjerski biro,

Zagreb,2006.

ROSO, Ivan: Neki problemi upravljanja, održavanja i zaštite pomorskog

dobra, Zbornik radova Pravnog fakulteta u Splitu, Split, br.4(64),

2001.

SARVAN, Desanka: Pravni status nekretnina u zaštićenim područjima,

Aktualnosti hrvatskog zakonodavstva i pravne prakse, Godišnjak

12,Informator, Zagreb,2006.

SERŠIĆ, Vanja: Koncesijsko odobrenje i načelo tržišnog natjecanja,

Aktualnosti hrvatskog zakonodavstva i pravne prakse, Godišnjak 12,

Organizator, Zagreb,2005.

SERŠIĆ, Vanja:Koncesijsko odobrenje kao instrument gospodarskog

iskorištavanja dobara s posebnim osvrtom na pomorsko dobro, from D.,

Bolanča,D. et alia: Pomorsko dobro, Inženjerski biro, Zagreb, 2005.

SERŠIĆ, Vanja: Pomorsko dobro i jedinice lokalne samouprave, referat

from collection of papers Bolanča,D i dr.:Pomorsko dobro, Inženjerski

biro, Zagreb,2005.

SIMONETTI, Petar: Stvarna prava na pomorskom dobru i na zgradama

koje su na njemu izgrađene, from collection of papers: Hlača, Vinko:

19

Pomorsko dobro.-društveni aspekti upotrebe i korištenja, Pravni fakultet

Sveučilišta u Rijeci,Rijeka,1996.

STAPIĆ, Sanja: Dalmacijavino duguje 683 milijuna kuna, Slobodna

Dalmacija, izdanje od 19.12.2008. godine

ŠIMUNOVIĆ. Ivo: Obalni prostor i pomorsko gospodarstvo, Zbornik

radova Pomorskog fakulteta u Rijeci, sv.2., Rijeka,1993.

VLADUŠIĆ, Julijana: Određivanje granica pomorskog dobra, Zbornik

radova Pravnog fakulteta u Splitu, 46, No.1., 2009.

VUKMANOVIĆ, Dubravka: Pretvorba i privatizacija na pomorskom

dobru, paper from collection of papers Bolanča i dr.: Pomorsko dobro,

Inženjerski biro,Zagreb,2005.

ŽIŽOVIĆ, Bojan: Sportska lučica u Pješčanoj uvali nelegalna, Glas

Istre,Pula edition from 10TH January 2013. godine,

ŽUVELA, Mladen- CRNIĆ, Jadranko: Pretvorba, privatizacija,

denacionalizacija-pravni status neobuhvaćenih odnosno

neprocijenjenih nekretnina-primjena čl.47. Zakona o privatizaciji,

Pravo i porezi, Zagreb, br.3.,2001.

c) Laws, rulebooks and other legal acts:

Declaration on environmental protection (Official Gazette nr.34/92)

Penal Law (Official Gazette nr.110/97, 129/00,51/01,105/2004, 84/2005)

Maritime Code (Official Gazette nr.181/04,76/07)

The Rulebook about registering and marking of maritime domain

(Official Gazette nr.29/05)

Directive about the procedure of giving concession upon the maritime

domain (Official Gazette nr.23/004,101/04)

Directive about the procedure of defining the maritime domain

borders (Official Gazette nr.8/04,82/05)

The Constitution of Republic of Croatia (Official Gazette

nr.44/01,55/01)

Act of General Administrative Procedure, Official Gazette No.(47/09

Act Of Hydrographical Activities (Official Gazette nr.68/98,110/98)

Concession Act (Official gazette nr.125/08)

Act of Liability Of Legal Entities For Penal Acts (Official Gazette

nr.151/03)

Islands Act (Official Gazette nr.34/99,149/99,32/02)

Maritime Domain And Seaports Act (Official Gazette nr.158/03

100/04, 141/06 38/09)

Act Of Physical Planning And Building (Official Gazette nr.76/07)

Act About Ownership And Other Rights In Rem (Official Gazette

nr.91/96,68/98,137/99,22/00,73/00, 114/01,79/06, 141/06)

Real – Estates Registers Act (Official Gazette

nr.91/96,68/98¸137/99,114/01)

c) Decisions:

The decision about giving the concession on the part of the beach in

Seget Donji for a purpose of conducting tourist activities, (Official

Gazette nr.91/06)

20

The decision about taking away the concession on the beach Bene in

cadastre district Split, (Official Gazette of county Split – Dalmatia

nr.3/04)

The decision about giving the concession on the part of the Donja

Podstrana ( Official Gazette of Split-Dalmatia County,nr.1/2007)

Decision of giving consent to the transfer of the concession of the

maritime domain for the purpose of commercial use to carry out

activities, Official Gazette,No(106/2012)

Decision of renunciation of concession for using prefabricated pier on

the coats of the island Bodulas (Municipality of Medulin),

http://www.istra-istria.hr/ fileadmin/ dokumenti/…85-10.doc:,taken

from1 June 2013.

Decision of taking away the concession on the maritime domain for

the purpose of commercial use-industrial port Dugi Rat ., Official

Gazette, (10/2003)

County court Pula decision of 18. November of 2002., nr. Gž-2463/01-2

Croatian Supreme Court decision of 9th October 1997, Rev 17/97)

County Court Split, decision of 3rd January 2007 year ,Gž-3249/06)