A Lithuanian businessman’s years-long battle with Vilnius district authorities over the demolition of his home has brought concerns about the country’s judicial system into sharp focus. Arūnas Bosas’s case, which began in 2016, highlights the potential for protracted legal disputes over property rights and the financial strain such battles can impose on individuals. Despite a Supreme Court ruling,the dispute continues,with Bosas now seeking full compensation for construction costs following the 2024 demolition of his property.
A Lithuanian businessman is locked in an eight-year legal battle with local authorities over the demolition of his home, a dispute he says highlights systemic issues within the country’s judicial system. The case underscores the challenges faced by individuals navigating complex property rights and bureaucratic delays.
Arūnas Bosas told reporters he has already invested nearly 1 million litas – the former Lithuanian currency – in acquiring the land and preparing to build. Now, he jokes, the property is “for the squirrels.”
“I am surprised by the Lithuanian court system,” Bosas said. “After the Supreme Court ruling, a second round of cases has begun. I’m glad I have a financial cushion, but I still have to give my entire pension to the lawyer.” Bosas’s personal wealth is estimated to be worth over 1 million euros.
He questioned what would happen to someone less financially secure, suggesting a young person who took out a bank loan to build a home could be devastated by such a protracted legal fight.
Bosas pointed to a similar case in Juodkrantė, a coastal town, where a building was demolished more quickly, and the state was obligated to compensate for the losses. “In my case, the case is still ongoing. There are still two court instances awaiting,” he said, adding that he is now approaching the situation with a sense of resignation.
He has accepted he likely won’t recover all of the funds invested in the planned home in the Vilnius district.
“Now I have a plot of land in the Vilnius district – for the squirrels,” Bosas quipped, referencing his previous venture establishing an elk park in Karklė.
Bosas maintains that the state is responsible for compensating for damages resulting from its own unlawful decisions and believes that compensation will eventually be awarded.
“The Supreme Court ruled that the municipality must compensate 90% of the losses incurred from the demolition of the estate, and the remaining 10% is my problem. Why? It seems unfair to me, but I decided not to appeal to the European Court of Human Rights. First, we need to wait for the end of these cases,” he explained.
He also expressed frustration with the delays caused by the Vilnius district municipality.
“They are checking all invoices, whether VAT was paid, performing Tax Inspectorate functions. It doesn’t really matter to me anymore whether the compensation is 5,000 euros more or less. However, the municipality does not take into account that 5% annual interest will also have to be paid, and the longer the case lasts, the greater their losses will be,” Bosas calculated.
“When I started building the house, I was 60 years old, now I am 71, and this story is still not over,” he said with irony.
Bosas’s wife, Daina Bosas, also criticized what she sees as selective justice. She pointed out on social media that other properties in the same forest area were not demolished.
“Our house was marked for demolition – it was demolished. Another house was marked – it still stands, even deeper in the forest. What was wrong with our house? How did it harm the forest more?” Daina Bosas wrote, questioning the fairness of the situation.
The Bosas family’s home in the Vilnius district was demolished in 2024 after the Lithuanian Supreme Court determined the construction permit had been issued illegally. Initial estimates put the cost of demolishing the house, barn, and sauna at around 150,000 euros, with the Vilnius district municipality responsible for 90% and Bosas for the remaining 10%. Bosas is now seeking compensation for the cost of the construction itself.
