The problem of applying a vindication and negative claim
Problematic food, but it is quite important to understand the efficiency of the right to power to the land dilenka, є food about the legal nature of vimoga about the turning of the land dilyanka (or part of it) as an individual, self-willed. It is not possible to self-occupy the land dilyanka until the end of the land dilyanka from the owner of the land and cross over to the victorian land dilyanka. The very situation is the reason for the lack of rights in the legal qualifications of vimogi to turn self-imposed-to take the land dilyanka.
One of the steps before the decision of the self-occupied land dilyanka and the quality of the indigenous call. Tsey will be able to get the pole from the vimozi of the vlasnik, the merged volodynya, to the vladyka of the speech about the revolt to the vlasnik. It’s worth noting that it’s self-sufficient to occupy the land dilyanka; Practically meaningful legal qualifications of vimoga about self-employed occupation of a land plot of a pole in the fact that such a vimogue can be used in a given position, then the rules about the term of the period of prescription will be extended to new ones. If you vvazat taku vimogu with a negative posture, then vimogi about the term pozovnoy prescription can not be stagnated until the end of vimogi, if the strangleholds are in koristuvanny є we are trivial to the ruined.
The criterion is that it is allowed to stand such a vimogue of the indication or a negative posture є the relaxation of the volodinnya. If self-imposed occupation of a land dilyanka means a release of volodinnya, then it is vimoga about turning such a land dilyanka into a vindicated posture. If the mercy of volodinnya is not vidbuvatsya, then vimoga about the seizure of such a right is a negative posture.
It will stay for an hour perevazhaє pіdkhіd, zgіdno zakim yakim yakim yakim yakim zanyutt land dіlyanka pozivach for the seizure of the right of power to the land dіlyanka m zvertatisya in a negative pose. For example, on the thought of G. Nikolenko
"A thought about self-employment of the land dilyanka, about the claim of the right of the volodinnya, for the second time, grab for the other vindication, like є pardon," added title to the whole "
In our glance, when we look at such a position, we can compare "volodinnya" with "right volodinnya". Not far away is the formulation of the provisions of Ukrainian legislation about volodinnya and so vvazati. For example, chapter 31 of the Civil Code of Ukraine dated January 16, 2003, No. 435-IV2 (dal - CC), I will call it "The right to volodinnya someone else's mine." The words "someone else's mine" means that the right of power to a person can be possessed by one person, and for singing minds to a qiu zh rich can win the right to volodinnya. At the same time, the legislator is talking about "the right of volodinnya", and not about the actual volodinnya. At the same time, the legislator is talking about "the right of volodinnya", and not about the factually volodinnya. The name of article 397 of the Central Committee "Sub'ekti rights of volodinnya by someone else's mine" also applies to those who, in this article, about the "right to volodinnya" ricchu. At the same time, the part of the Persha of Article 397 of the Central Committee to speak about those who, the legislator regulates the statute itself, is actually volodynnya, zokrema, rightly with the statute "[in] the other's man's young man is a person who is actually" trim. The volodinnya itself is actually regulated by the third part of the article 397 of the Central Committee, which is why “[f] actively volodinnya minen’s entrusted to the rightful, as it doesn’t respect the law, nor is it established by the courts”. The norms of a part of the first and third statute 397 of the Central Committee consolidated the order with a part of the other part of the statute, in which there is also about the "right of volodinnya", the norm of a part of another statti 397 of the Central Committee was formulated as ".
The provisions of Article 397 of the Civil Code are so contradictory that it seems counterproductive to us to resort to its logical and semantic analysis in order to establish what the legislator had the purpose of saying to them. It is more expedient to proceed from the purpose of the institution of ownership and from what functions this institution can perform, and has conditioned its consolidation in the Civil Code along with the institutions of property rights and other property rights.
Possession (possessio) in Roman law meant precisely "... the factual content By the way, combined with the intention to consider it your own" 3. This opinion is confirmed by the sources of Roman law. The Digests of Justinian contains such a characteristic of ownership “[in] olodinnya was named, as Labeo says, from the city of settledness as a place of residence, since it is naturally held by those who settled on it ...” (D. 41.2.1) 4 Further, in the second and third sentences of the third paragraph of the same book, Digest of Justinian states “[a] Ofili and Nerva the son argue that even without the will of the guardian, the young can begin to possess. After all, (possession) concerns a fact, not a right ”(D. 41.2.1.3) 1.
In the case of unauthorized occupation of a land plot, the deprivation of the right of ownership does not occur, but the deprivation of actual possession of the thing (land plot) takes place. The very fact of deprivation of the actual possession of a thing is a sign of a vindication claim, therefore, the requirement to return such a land plot is a vindication claim.
In our opinion, the extension of the limitation period to such claims is justified, however, such a decision requires legislative confirmation, in particular, by amending Article 268 of the Civil Code. Under the conditions of the current legislation, there is reason to believe that the ownership right of the owner of the land plot may be terminated by missing the statute of limitations on the return of the land plot from the person who arbitrarily occupied it.
They work for you
