scholarly journals Derelikce nemovitosti a její právněhistorické kořeny

2021 ◽  
Vol 51 (2) ◽  
pp. 111-128
Author(s):  
Marek Novák
Keyword(s):  
Real Estate ◽  
Civil Code ◽  
State Ownership ◽  
Roman Law ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The Real ◽  
The Real Estate ◽  
Original Owner ◽  
Property Registration ◽  
The Right

It follows from the case law of the Supreme and Constitutional Court that everyone has the right to leave immovable property if they do not illegally avoid liability for non-fulfilment of their own obligations. The legal institute of dereliction has its origins in Roman law, which emphasized the free will of the owner deciding to abandon property. The dereliction of real estate according to the Civil Code in effect takes place by the legal action itself, by which the owner expresses the will to abandon the thing. Declaratory nature of property registration in the real estate cadastre might follow the recodification work in the 1920s and 1930s, as it differs from the General civil code (ABGB) regulation. Moreover, the Civil Code is influenced by socialist legislation when it transfers abandoned real estate to state ownership automatically. Although this was originally considered a measure in favour of the society, it is likely to cause difficulties. In recent years, laconic provisions of the Civil Code have provoked a discussion on the requisites of the application for the registration of state ownership in the real estate cadastre. The cadastral offices and some courts initially considered that the application must be accompanied by a consent statement from the original owner and the state, which, however, contradicts the characteristic of dereliction as a unilateral act. The Supreme Court strongly opposed this practice and interpreted the nature of dereliction in its decisions in detail.

scholarly journals Urban Heritage as Ethos in Resource-Based Small-Scale Property Management

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (19) ◽  
pp. 5354
Author(s):  
Ingrid Martins Holmberg
Keyword(s):  
Real Estate ◽  
Real Estate Market ◽  
Small Scale ◽  
The Real ◽  
The Real Estate ◽  
Construction Market ◽  
Urban Heritage ◽  
The Real Estate Market ◽  
Set Up ◽  
The Right

This study puts urban heritage in the setting of property owners’ small-scale and resource-based management of ordinary old buildings. This phenomenon indicates a need not only to reconceptualize urban heritage in its actual complex web of negotiations over constraints of the regulation (urban planning, including preservation) and economy (the real estate market) but also to pay attention to the emergence of a new ethos. The case concerns a Swedish second-city context and the specific moment in time: When the 1990s recession had disarmed the real estate market. Based upon ethnographic fieldwork, this study used an assemblage perspective to allow for a following of entanglements of material and matter. The study sheds light upon the emergence of a small-scale and resource-based management in the midst of managerially defined cycles of investment. Important for the output was 1) the set-up of a network of skilled craftsmen, antiquarians, and entrepreneurs ‘of the right mindset that enabled for the authentic material result but that also helped navigate regulation and financial parties, 2) the “alternative market for reverential maintenance and repair” that guaranteed the appropriate supply of materials, products, and skills that differed from the mainstream construction market. For the means of understanding the ethos involved, the study introduced the notion of “factual life-span of buildings”. The overall aim of this article was to contribute to research on heritage urbanism by adding a resource management perspective that focusses on the entanglements of material and matter.

scholarly journals LEGITYMACJA PROCESOWA UMOWNEGO ZARZĄDCY NIERUCHOMOŚCI

2016 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 203
Author(s):  
Grzegorz Jędrejek
Keyword(s):  
Real Estate ◽  
Common Property ◽  
Civil Code ◽  
Third Parties ◽  
Property Law ◽  
The Real ◽  
The Real Estate ◽  
The Third

Judicial Ticket of a Contractual Real Estate ManagerSummary The aim of this article is to explain all doubts referring to a judicial ticket of a contractual real estate manager, which has been legislated in a co-owners’ contract. The issue mentioned above arouses controversy in doctrine but also in judicature. One has adopted a stance in the article, that the real estate manager has got the title to bring the action before the court, which is based on the article 201 of the civil code. A contract connected with entrusting management does not deprive the owners of the rights, including claims consisting of property law. Co-owners allow third parties to carry out entitlements connected with management of a common property. The article consists of three parts. The first one contains concise deliberations about the notion of legitimization. The problem of a judicial ticket of a manager, who was legislated in a contract by co-owners of a common property (article 199-202 of the civil code) was discussed in the second part. The third part of the article is connected with a judicial ticket of a real estate manager, which was mentioned in an act of proprietorship of premises.

scholarly journals Teoretyczne i praktyczne aspekty wyceny prawa użytkowania wieczystego gruntu

2018 ◽  
Vol 18(33) (4) ◽  
pp. 323-332
Author(s):  
Elwira Laskowska ◽  
Anna Twardowska
Keyword(s):  
Real Estate ◽  
The Real ◽  
The Real Estate ◽  
The Right

The main purpose of this study is the comparison of the rules in order to specify the appraisal of the land according to the aim of the appraisal connected with the perpetual usufruct. Another purpose is to indicate main problems related to the appraisal of this right. The area of the study covers the rules and the problems of the appraisal of this law for the following aims: establishment of the perpetual usufruct, update the charges for the perpetual usufruct, the transformation the perpetual usufruct into ownership and the secondary sale. The analysis of the source literature and the regulations were applied and the survey was conducted among the persons who are authorized to appraise the real estate in order to achieve the purpose of the study. The obtained results confirm the imperfection of the provisions regulating the appraisal principles related to the right of perpetual usufruct. This results in a different level of value depending on the purpose of the estimation. Also in the property appraisers opinion, the appraisal connected with the perpetual usufruct poses difficulties.

scholarly journals LEGAL ASPECTS OF LAND FORMATION UNDER REAL ESTATE OBJECTS

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (161) ◽  
pp. 129-133
Author(s):  
S. Nesterenko ◽  
Y. Radzinska ◽  
V. Frolov ◽  
P. Firsov
Keyword(s):  
Real Estate ◽  
Mutual Influence ◽  
Residential Building ◽  
Regulatory Requirements ◽  
The Real ◽  
The Real Estate ◽  
Land Plot ◽  
State Registration ◽  
The Right ◽  
Ownership Of Land

Given the provisions of the existing regulatory framework, contributions and achievements in the development of modern land management, it can be noted that the current outline of legal features of land and real estate, the presence of significant gaps and unresolved issues need to clarify these problems and find effective practical measures. The purpose of the article is to study the existing regulatory requirements for the acquisition of ownership of real estate in combination with ownership of land. The article examines the existing regulatory requirements for the acquisition of ownership of real estate in combination with ownership of land. The paper analyzes modern approaches to obtaining the right to land under real estate in Ukraine. The procedure for assigning a cadastral number before the alienation of real estate is determined; schemes of land formation under the real estate object; the procedure for state registration of real estate rights and the grounds for refusal of it and others are determined. The order, principles, requirements and regulatory documents at formation of the ground area under real estate objects are offered. The article considers the peculiarities of assigning a cadastral number to the land plot on which the residential building is located. It is noted that the state registration of land plots is carried out at their location by the relevant state cadastral registrar. It is determined that the acquisition of the right to a person's share in the ownership of a residential building, building or structure under the contract as a result of state registration of rights is a fact of acquisition of real estate. The norms specified in the article establish the general principle of integrity of the real estate object with the land plot on which this object is located. According to these norms, the definition of land rights is directly dependent on the ownership of the building and structure. The provisions developed in the article will increase the efficiency of land use and real estate by defining regulations on their mutual influence.

Right-of-way for Transmission Facilities as Regulation of Legal Relationships Regarding Real Estate between the Real Estate Owner and the Transmission Entity

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Przewiezlikowska
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
Real Estate ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Real Property ◽  
The Real ◽  
The Real Estate ◽  
Right Of Way ◽  
Estate Owner ◽  
Construction Permit ◽  
The Right

In Poland, after World War II, most of the technical infrastructure was built based on a construction permit, and without a legal title to a given real property. Therefore, a necessity arose for the regulation of property rights where technical infrastructure was built. For the establishment of the right-of-way for transmission facilities it is essential to regulate the legal relationships between the owner of the real estate and the transmission entity and their entry into the land and mortgage register. The extent of the granted right-of-way determines the value of consideration for the owner of the encumbered property. This study analyzes the rules for the determination, establishment and surveying preparation of the right-of-way for various types of transmission facilities. First a thorough examination of the legal status of the real property was required and then the extent of the necessary right-of-way to be established for the given facilities was analyzed. The next stage of the study involved determining the extent of the rights-of-way and appropriate protective zones for the networks pursuant to the relevant technical guidelines. The analysis revealed significant diversity of legal regulations on the establishment of the right-of-way for the specific types of public utilities.

scholarly journals But Where's the Contract? A Tribute to Professor David McLauchlan

2011 ◽  
Vol 42 (1) ◽  
pp. 3
Author(s):  
Amelia Keene ◽  
Sarah Leslie
Keyword(s):  
Real Estate ◽  
Case Note ◽  
The Real ◽  
The Real Estate ◽  
Personal Recollection ◽  
Contract Formation ◽  
Legal Arguments ◽  
Real Estate Agents ◽  
The Right ◽  
Legal Right

This article is a tribute to Professor David McLauchlan on the occasion of his 40th teaching anniversary. The first part is a personal recollection from each of the two authors. The second part is a joint case note.  It poses the question: how could a real estate firm who knew the vendor did not intend to appoint the firm as agent nevertheless have a legal right to withhold commission? In the decision of Nightingale v Barfoot Ltd, Venning J confirmed that the firm had such a right.  This article challenges the accuracy of that conclusion, suggesting that as there was no evidence to support the formation of an agency agreement, the real estate firm did not have the right to deduct commission. It analyses critically a number of the legal arguments raised in the case and those that should have been raised, including those concerning contract formation, the objective principle, promissory estoppel, and the effect of s 62 of the Real Estate Agents Act 1976 and the Contracts Privity Act 1982.  Much responsibility for the outcome of the case must be pinned on counsel for the vendor, who failed to stop and ask himself "But Where’s The Contract"?

scholarly journals A vagyoni értékű jogok apportálhatósága és az egységes szabályozás hiányának problematikája

2015 ◽  
Vol 12 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 114-120
Author(s):  
Zóra Zsófia Lehoczki
Keyword(s):  
Real Estate ◽  
Income Tax ◽  
Civil Code ◽  
Personal Income ◽  
The Other ◽  
Personal Income Tax ◽  
The Real Estate ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
The Right

According to the new Hungarian Civil Code, the funders of the legal entities have to make contributions to the authorised capital and the two forms of these contributions are the contribution is cash and the contribution in kind. The regulation states that proprietary rights can also be transferred to the capital of businness accociations, by those funders, who are entitled to demise them. The judicial practice unanimously defined the rules in those cases, when the object of contribution in kind is a certain proprietary right, especially when the right is connected to the real estate. On the other hand, the Civil Code does not contain a list of those proprietary rights, which can be transferred to the authorised capital and unfortunately, different acts contain different lists of these rights. The three mentioned acts are the following: the personal income tax act, the act about the fees and the accounting act. All of them contain a list of proprietary rights and some of the items are regulated by all the three of them but most of the items are different, which means it is impossible to create an accurate list of these rights. For example, the list in the personal income tax act contains only five items, on the other hand, the accounting act contains two lists and both of them are unfinised. Because of the lack of unified rules, it is impossible to define which proprietary rights can become the objects of contribution in kind and this misfortunate situation causes a lot of unwanted indefinability and states a lot of questions. In my essay I introduce this problem and I use a chart to illustrate the differences between the mentioned lists. In my opinion, this problem could be solved with an unified list, which is normative for every regulation in connection with the proprietary rights or the Civil Code should contain a list of those proprietary rights, which can be the objects of contribution in kind.

Whitman, Melville, Crane, and the Labors of American Poetry

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Riley
Keyword(s):  
Real Estate ◽  
Herman Melville ◽  
American Poetry ◽  
Hart Crane ◽  
Contingent Labor ◽  
Cultural Logic ◽  
The Real ◽  
The Real Estate ◽  
Economic Paradigm ◽  
The Right

This book confronts an enduring investment in the poetic vocation. It seeks to challenge a dominant cultural logic that frames contingent labor as a sacrifice that frustrates the righteous progress towards realizing that seemingly purest of callings: Poet. Incorporating the often overlooked or excluded workaday ephemera of three canonical U.S. Romantic poets—Walt Whitman, Herman Melville, and Hart Crane—it offers new archival insights that call for a re-examination of celebrated literary careers and questions their status as affirmatory icons of vocation. The poetry of Whitman the real estate dealer, Melville the customs inspector, and Crane the copywriter, does not constitute the formal inscription of a discrete poetic labor struggling against quotidian work towards the fulfilment of an exceptional individual career. Instead, the distracted forms of their poetry are always already intermingled with a variety of apparently lesser labors. Ousting poetic production from any sanctuary of privileged repose or transcendent focus, this book refigures the work of the poet as a living sensuous activity that transgresses labor’s conventional divisions and hierarchies. It consequently recasts the poet as a figure who unfastens and reimagines the “right of passage” vocational logic that does so much to reproduce the current political and economic paradigm.

A Comparative Perspective on the Concept of Ownership in Russian Law: From the Svod Zakonov to the 1994 Civil Code

2016 ◽  
Vol 41 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 263-341 ◽  
Author(s):  
Murray Raff ◽  
Anna Taitslin
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Local Variation ◽  
Operative Management ◽  
Land Ownership ◽  
Civil Code ◽  
State Ownership ◽  
Roman Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
Unitary Concept

The modern European unitary conception of ownership emerged from the dissolution of feudalism and achievement of a deeper understanding of Roman law to become an ideal of property law in the European Civil-Law tradition. Prior to its dissolution European feudalism represented hierarchies of legal tenure in land, such as the division of land ownership between dominus directus (direct owner) and dominus utilis (beneficial owner) and overlapping hierarchies of social class descending from monarchy and aristocracy to bonded serfdom. Support for the resolution of divided land ownership and victory for the unitary concept of ownership was found in the Roman law tradition. The dissolution of feudal hierarchies took different historical courses in the legal traditions that we now identify as the French, German, Common-Law and Russian legal systems and with great local variation even within those emergent traditions. The unitary concept of ownership is found today in the French and German Civil Codes and is for practical purposes reflected in the prevalence of the common-law tenure of freehold. In Russia the systemized digest of the laws of the Russian Empire, the Svod Zakonov of 1832, provided no civil-law notion of divided ownership or perpetual rights. In the Soviet era exclusive state ownership of land and the means of production was also viewed as unitary, which raised serious questions about how state agencies and enterprises could engage in transactions with their assets and products. Venediktov’s celebrated doctrine of the right of operative management, codified in the Civil Code of the rsfr of 1964, provided legal recognition of de facto proprietary rights for state enterprises. This introduced a form of divided ownership ‘on the ground’ despite the dogma of unitary state ownership. This reality further manifested itself in widespread division of ownership between land and buildings. The Civil Code of the Russian Federation of 1994 retained and even extended some of these solutions that relied on split or divided ownership. This might have been a pragmatic way forward in the early 1990s, however twenty years later the demands of a modern sophisticated legal system require a policy trajectory back toward a modern European unitary conception of ownership. The Russian Civil Code thus should be extended in this direction.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document