We compiled an analysis commissioned by the Estonian Government Office to assess whether Estonia could follow the example of some other European countries and abandon the requirement for a usage permit for residential buildings and apartment buildings, and considering how such a change would affect safety, the administrative burden and legal clarity.

The analysis, entitled “The necessity of occupancy permits for private houses and apartment buildings and proposals for Estonia”, recommends replacing occupancy permits with occupancy notifications for low-risk residential buildings, while maintaining adequate supervision and safety standards. In the case of blocks of flats, it advises that the occupancy permit system should be retained. The overall objective should be to reduce the administrative burden while avoiding any reduction in safety or legal clarity.

There are no examples elsewhere of a completely pre-control-free system – at a minimum, a notification or independent expert assessment is mandatory.

The analysis examined practices in Finland, Sweden, France, the Netherlands and Germany. In Finland and Sweden, a final inspection before use is mandatory – a building may not be used until official approval has been given. In France, a declaration is submitted after completion of construction, followed by a three-month appeal period. In the Netherlands, local government must be notified before a building is put into use, and a statement from an independent quality assurance body must be submitted; for smaller residential buildings, notification is sufficient. In Baden-Württemberg in Germany, the authorities may require either notification or pre-use acceptance; for simpler residential buildings, notification is adequate.

Five proposals for amending the Building Code

  1. Replace the occupancy permit with a notice of occupancy for low-risk residential buildings (detached houses, terraced houses, semi-detached houses, summer houses, garden houses, houses containing two flats).
  2. Submission of a notice of use is exempt from state fees, and the dwelling can be put into use as soon as the notice has been submitted, i.e. once construction work has been completed. The aim is also to limit the amount of information to be submitted, i.e. the scope of construction documentation, which is checked when granting permission to use the dwelling.
  3. For blocks of flats (with three or more flats), the requirement for an occupancy permit should be retained to ensure compliance with safety requirements.
  4. The notification procedure could involve:
    1. setting an automatic deadline for the granting of additional conditions (after a maximum of 40 days, the building may be used, and no further additional conditions may be imposed)
    2. simplifying documentation requirements (e.g., construction project and other construction documentation, such as construction logs or as-built drawings, should only be prepared to the extent necessary)
    3. give the competent authority the right to suspend the use of a building if there is a risk of danger
  5. Unregulated activities or private audits (as in the Netherlands) are not recommended, as this would increase costs and uncertainty.

What would be the impacts and risks of these changes?

Positive effects of these changes:

  • decreased administrative burden for obtaining an occupancy permit and faster commissioning of residential buildings
  • faster real estate transactions.
  • easier for entrepreneurs to transfer buildings[WM1]
  • exemption from occupancy permit requirements would not mean that residential buildings would not have to comply with the requirements of the Building Code or that the conditions set out in the building permit could be disregarded

Adverse effects and risks:

Public control over safety requirements may be reduced.

  • There will be uncertainty about when a building is ultimately completed. It may also be unclear as to whether it complies with safety requirements, i.e., whether a competent person has inspected the building and related conditions.
  • Ordering assessments from a competent person may be more expensive than the state fee for a use permit.
  • This may affect the property’s value and the reliability of the collateral.
  • For less significant residential buildings, retain only the notice of use for all construction activities.
  • At the same time, the conversion of apartment buildings into nursing homes should be subject to an occupancy permit, as this is a resource-intensive and high-impact activity.
  • Specify the form of the notice of use and reduce the documentation required.

Our team

The analysis was prepared by counsel from our Real Estate & Construction team Sandra Mikli, and assistant lawyer Elisabeth Liiv.