The legal nature of the property right in a build-operate-construction contract -Analysis study -

International institutions such as the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) and the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO), provide model guidelines to guide developing countries towards solutions that spare these countries from borrowing from entities such as the World Bank and others, and encourage resorting to partnerships between the public and private sectors through model contracts called BOT contracts. In this research, we will shed light on the element of property rights in contracts in light of the guidelines of these international institutions, in order to conclude more balanced contracts and thus create legislation that takes into account the legal nature of BOT contracts and their specificity, and facilitates the flow of private investments, whether foreign or national, and avoids legislation that is inconsistent with achieving contractual balance, creating more stable contractual relations. We find that ownership in a BOT contract is not the same as in other types of contracts known as public utility obligations, which many jurisprudences classify BOT under the category of "public works concessions." Rather, BOT contracts differ significantly in that they are contracts for financing construction and infrastructure, rather than for exploiting natural resources. Some jurisprudence classifies BOTs within the category of concessions. Even those who claim that they are private law contracts, whether civil or international trade law, are themselves influenced in their view by the administrative contract when dealing with this contract. We conclude that ownership in a BOT contract is temporary and depends on the domain it occupies. The land may revert to the state from the beginning of the contract, but the new developments are owned by the project company, which must transfer this ownership to the contracting authority at the end of the project.