What is the legal status of farms and other real estate abandoned during forced migrations?

Question

Does international law have anything to say about this, or is it up to the law of the individual countries? Who became the owners of the land, for example, which was abandoned in Eastern Europe during the mass fleeing of people at the end of WWII? Did any of these countries ever recognize that the refugees had property ownership rights?

Answer 1

there is un  protocol on such matters and its a tough time trying to get back the property after such a long lapse.  for east erp - it fell into communist hands and no way of getting it back. their rights  being ignored completely.     state laws r there but statute of limitation maybe applicable.  

what can be done is to present a collective petition with few hundred families - then the govt may hv to listen and also get un intervention.  its a lengthy laborious task

Answer 2

International law has elaborated a fairly complete set of norms protecting property during war, the violation of which gives rise to a duty of reparation. These norms belong to such diverse fields of law as the law of armed conflicts, human rights law, refugee law, the law of international investment and ius ad bellum, which prohibits aggression in international relations.

Reparation for damage of war is a concept introduced in international law after the First World War. It is based on the idea that liability follows from responsibility for the violation of a pre-existing legal norm. Before the 20th century, it depended on the balance of powers between warring States whether or not any damage was made good: the victor decided, regardless of fault.

A theoretical scheme exists which prescribes full, inter-State reparation in the form of restitution, or return of property. Late 20th century practice shows, however, that States often deviate from this theoretical scheme. This practice is especially clear in the case of so-called mass claims bodies, established to handle great numbers of claims after war. Examples of such mass claims bodies are the United Nations Compensation Commission (UNCC), established to deal with Iraq’s liability after the 1990-1991 Gulf War; the Commission for Real Property Claims of Displaced Persons and Refugees (CRPC), established to decide claims regarding immovable property in the context of the war in Bosnia-Herzegovina; and the Eritrea-Ethiopia Claims Commission (EECC), established to handle liability claims stemming from the war between both States.



This late 20th century practice first grants more elaborate rights to individuals, which may be allowed to personally present their claims for reparation to the enemy State. Furthermore, an increasingly important role is played by the international community (especially the United Nations) and by private responsible parties (especially multinational corporations). Second, the amount of reparation is often limited to cover only part of the damage caused. An important reason therefor is the limited capacity to pay of many States. Finally, in practice monetary compensation is awarded far more frequently than restitution.



Except for the primary norms protecting property, few rules regarding reparation are firmly laid down in international legal instruments. Rather, the applicable norms follow from customary law. Under the influence mainly of the practice of mass claims bodies and human rights institutions, international law may currently be witnessing a gradual departure from the theoretical reparation scheme.

Answer 3

The laws of the country prevails over lands that are abandoned by occupants.

Answer 4

Well to start with, International law would have very very little to say about this.  Traditionally international law deals with only the relationship between states.  That is, if you're not a country than international law doesn't matter to you.  This has started to change over the years, but by and large this is still the case, and certainly was during WWII.  

As a more practical matter I can tell you that during the Interment of the Japanese in America during WWII their property was sold and they were given the proceeds.  This amounted to virtually nothing since it was a forced sale and everyone knew it was a forced sale, but we at least pretended to be...fair?  

Property that is actually abandoned is going to be governed by the laws of the country.  The US has laws on how to tell if property is abandoned, how to take title if it is, and soforth.  Refugees fleeing, as crappy as it is, are really just abandoning anything they leave behind and I'd wager some sort of finders keepers type laws exist or the land escrows to the state.