REURB and Properties on Federal Leased Land (“Foro”): The Case of Alphaville

Alphaville is one of the most highly valued neighborhoods in the São Paulo Metropolitan Region. However, behind the sophistication of its developments lies a relevant legal peculiarity: many properties are located on land leased to the Federal Government, known as terrenos de marinha (federal coastal lands) or subject to the foro regime.

In these cases, the private party holds only the right of occupation or perpetual leasehold (aforamento), paying an annual ground rent (foro) and, in certain transfers, a transfer fee (laudêmio) to the Federal Government. The problem arises when the land is registered, but the construction built on it remains irregular, without annotation in the Land Registry and without municipal approval.

This article analyzes how Urban Land Regularization (REURB) can be applied to this special ownership regime, outlining the steps for urban, registral, and patrimonial compliance with the Federal Government.

1. The Leasehold (Foro and Aforamento) Regime

Aforamento is a split-ownership system by which the Federal Government grants a private party perpetual use of land, in exchange for payment of:

·         Annual ground rent (foro) – a percentage of the direct ownership value of the land;

·         Transfer fee (laudêmio) – a percentage owed to the Federal Government in the event of an onerous transfer.

In the Land Registry, the record of the leased land appears, but in many cases, the construction built on it does not, creating a legal gap.

2. The Problem of Unregistered Constructions

When a building, condominium, or house is erected on leased land but lacks municipal approval and registration:

·         The land exists legally, but the construction does not exist in law;

·         Insurers may deny coverage, alleging lack of registral existence;

·         Banks refuse to grant financing;

·         Condominiums lack legal standing to collect fees or enforce rights in court;

·         In disputes, only the land can be litigated, leaving the construction in legal limbo.

3. The Role of REURB in These Cases

REURB can be applied in Alphaville and other developments on leased land, provided that:

·         The occupation was consolidated by December 22, 2016;

·         The construction is permanent and used for housing or economic activity.

3.1. Urban Steps (Municipality)

·         Preparation of an as-built plan and descriptive report;

·         Approval of the construction by the Municipality;

·         Technical inspections (engineering and Fire Department).

3.2. Registral Steps (Land Registry)

·         Registration of the Land Regularization Certificate (CRF);

·         Annotation of the construction in the leased land’s registry;

·         Opening of individualized titles for each autonomous unit (in case of buildings or condominiums).

3.3. Patrimonial Steps (Federal Government / SPU)

·         Updating records with the Secretariat of Federal Heritage (SPU);

·         Recognition of the construction for calculation of foro and laudêmio;

·         Regularization of the leaseholder’s rights in relation to the Federal Government’s direct ownership.

4. Risks of the Irregular Situation

Keeping only the land registered without the construction entails serious risks:

·         Civil: residents may lose assets in disputes without registral backing;

·         Criminal: condominium managers may face liability in the event of accidents (fire, collapse) without AVCB or regularization;

·         Economic: properties lose market value and cannot be financed;

·         Tax-related: the Federal Government may impose fines for unregistered occupation.

5. The Path to Regularization

In Alphaville, the regularization strategy requires three coordinated fronts:

1.       Municipality – urban approval and issuance of the CRF through REURB;

2.       Land Registry – annotation of the construction and, if applicable, opening of individualized titles;

3.       SPU (Secretariat of Federal Heritage) – cadastral update and recognition of the construction within the leasehold regime.

Conclusion

The case of Alphaville demonstrates that land and urban irregularities are not exclusive to peripheral areas. Even in high-standard neighborhoods, there are buildings and condominiums erected on federal leasehold lands without approval and without registral annotation of the construction.

REURB, combined with Land Registry and SPU proceedings, is the proper route to transform this reality, granting full legal security to the property.

Regularization is not only a legal obligation but also a tool for property appreciation and protection against civil, criminal, and economic risks.

In short: in Alphaville’s leasehold regime, it is not enough to have the land registered — the construction itself must be regularized for the asset to truly exist both in fact and in law.