Permanent residence not a condition for inclusion of a dwelling in the permit register

Judgment of the Council for Permit Disputes (RvVb) of October 2, 2025, no. RvVb-A-2526-0072

What is the permit register?

Every Flemish municipality is required to maintain a permit register. This is a digital database in which information about spatial planning is collected for each plot of land. For example, you can find out which permits have ever been granted or refused.

Older buildings are usually not included in this database because they were built without a formal permit at the time. However, the regulations provide for the possibility of including these structures in the permit register, for example, if it can be demonstrated that they were built before April 22, 1962 (the start of the general permit requirement).

For such buildings, the so-called presumption of permission applies: if it can be proven that a building existed before 1962, it is automatically considered to have been granted permission, even if no building permit exists for it. The evidence for this presumption must relate not only to the construction of the building, but also to the original function for which it was built at the time – for example, as a dwelling, shop, stable, etc.

For owners, inclusion in the permit register can be particularly interesting, as the presumption of permission is confirmed by the municipality through the inclusion. This not only offers greater legal certainty, but can also increase the value of the property.

Facts of the case

The owner of a 19th-century property in Kapellen asked the municipality to recognize the building – for which no building permit is known to exist – as a “deemed permitted dwelling” because it was built before 1962.

The municipality decided to include the building in the permit register, but only as a weekend residence. In doing so, it acknowledged that the building had indeed been constructed before 1962, but felt that there was no evidence of permanent residence to allow the property to be included as a ‘dwelling’.

The owner disagreed with this, especially since she could prove that the building had been known as a residential house since at least the 1950s. She therefore lodged an appeal with the Council for Permit Disputes.

What did the Council for Permit Disputes decide?

In this ruling, the Council made it clear that the concept of ‘dwelling’ does not depend on whether someone lives there permanently. A dwelling is ‘any immovable property that is primarily intended for the accommodation of a family or a single person’ (Article 1.3, §1, 66° of the Flemish Housing Code).

The Council thus emphasized that the municipal government may not derive any additional requirement of permanent residence from this definition. A building can perfectly well be considered a dwelling, even if it is temporarily unoccupied or only used sporadically.

The municipality’s decision was therefore overturned.

Conclusion

With this ruling, the Council for Permit Disputes reminds local authorities that the residential function of a building does not depend on whether someone actually lives there. A dwelling remains a dwelling as long as it is primarily intended for habitation, even if it is temporarily vacant or only used sporadically.

---

Please do not hesitate to contact Andersen’s real estate team in Belgium for more information and assistance in similar cases and proceedings before the Council for Permit Disputes.
Matias Osorio Olivera (Counsel)