Supreme Court of Sweden to review meteorite ownership dispute

The Supreme Court of Sweden is now taking up the case of a meteorite dispute between meteorite hunters and a landowner, marking a unique event in Swedish legal history. Meteorite hunters and geologists, Anders Zetterqvist and Andreas Forsberg, are appealing after losing a high-profile dispute in the Court of Appeal over a meteorite that landed outside Enköping.

In November 2020, Zetterqvist and Forsberg found the meteorite on the land of landowner Johan Benzelstierna von Engeström at the Refvelsta estate, located outside Enköping. The meteorite had recently landed on von Engeström's property, and the geologists discovered it during their meteorite hunting activities. The discovery led to a disagreement over who had the best right to the meteorite, prompting legal proceedings to resolve the dispute.

The case went to court because the parties were not in agreement about ownership of the meteorite. Zetterqvist and Forsberg believed they had the right to keep the meteorite they found, while von Engeström asserted that, since it was found on his land, it belonged to him. The lack of clear legislation regarding the ownership of meteorites contributed to the dispute.

In the District Court, the geologists won. The court ruled in favor of Zetterqvist and Forsberg, recognizing their claim to the meteorite. However, the landowner appealed the decision, leading to a new ruling in the Svea Court of Appeal.

In the Svea Court of Appeal, von Engeström won the case. According to the Court of Appeal, the meteorite should be considered real property and therefore belongs to the landowner. The court's decision was based on the interpretation that the meteorite, upon landing on von Engeström's land, became part of his property. This ruling reversed the earlier decision by the District Court.

The legislation did not provide any clear guidance in advance regarding the ownership of meteorites, making the case unique in Swedish legal history. Existing laws did not explicitly address meteorites, leading to differing interpretations in the courts. The Swedish Penal Code states that one may not take stones from another's land. While this law addresses the removal of stones, it does not mention meteorites specifically, contributing to the legal uncertainty in the case.

For antiquities, there is special legislation in Sweden, but meteorites are not mentioned at all in the legislation. The absence of meteorites in these laws has left a gap in legal guidance regarding their ownership. The lack of explicit legal provisions for meteorites has made it challenging to determine rightful ownership when they are found on private property.

According to the Court of Appeal, the meteorite's classification as real property means it belongs to the landowner. The court concluded that since the meteorite landed on von Engeström's land, it became part of his real property. This interpretation emphasized the importance of land ownership rights over the claims of those who find objects on that land.

The Supreme Court's decision to take up the case reflects the need to resolve these legal ambiguities. The outcome may set a precedent and provide clarity on the legal status of meteorites in Sweden. The ruling will have significant implications for future disputes over meteorite ownership and will contribute to the development of property law in the country.

As the legal battle continues, both the meteorite hunters and the landowner await the Supreme Court's decision. The case highlights the complexities that arise when existing laws do not explicitly address unique situations such as the ownership of meteorites. The ruling will provide important clarification on property rights concerning celestial objects that land on private property.

The Supreme Court's review of this case represents a significant moment in Swedish legal history. The decision will determine the rights of individuals who find meteorites on private land and may influence how similar cases are handled in the future. It underscores the challenges that can occur when natural events introduce unforeseen legal questions.

The case of the meteorite found by Zetterqvist and Forsberg at the Refvelsta estate brings attention to the intersection of scientific discovery and property law. The Supreme Court's forthcoming decision will be pivotal in establishing how meteorites are classified legally and who holds ownership when they are found on private land. The implications extend beyond the immediate parties involved, potentially affecting meteorite hunters, landowners, and the interpretation of property rights in Sweden.

As Sweden awaits the final decision, the case continues to spark discussion about ownership rights and the legal status of celestial objects. The Supreme Court's ruling may prompt legislative action to address such matters more clearly in the future. The outcome will provide much-needed clarity on the issue and may set a precedent for how similar disputes are resolved going forward.

Sources: Aftonbladet, Dagens Nyheter

This article was written in collaboration with generative AI company Alchemiq