scholarly journals KARAKTERISTIK HAK GUNA BANGUNAN DI ATAS TANAH HAK MILIK

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Marthen Salinding
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
The State ◽  
Property Right ◽  
Land Supply ◽  
Business World ◽  
Freedom Of Contract ◽  
Maximum Period ◽  
The Right ◽  
Laws And Regulations ◽  
Land Property Rights

Abstract The need for land for the business world is getting bigger, while the land supply is limited. One of the rights to land used by investors to support their business is the building rights. The  building rights.is the right to own and own buildings on land which is not his own with a maximum period of 30 years. The land which can be granted of the right building is the State Land, the land of management rights and the land of property rightsTeh Building Right  as one of the objects granting of Right Building is the hereditary, strongest and most fulfilled right which can be owned by people on the land keeping in mind the provisions in Article 6 of the Basic Agrarian Law.The Building Right  on the land Property rights have special characteristics because the granting of their rights is set forth in the form of deed granting of building Right on the land of property rights, which specifically regulates the agreement of the parties in order to fulfill the principle of freedom of contract. In addition, in making the deed granting of Building Right on the land of proprietary rights can be arranged specifically about the contents of the deed by deviating from the prevailing laws and regulations. Where a Building Rights Holders intend to impose a mortgage right and transfer this right shall obtain the consent of the right holder. This is different from the building right   on state land. The buildings rights  on state land may be borne by mortgages and transferred without obtaining the consent of othersKeywords; Building Right , Property  Right ,Land 

scholarly journals THE MODERN VISION OF THE SYSTEM OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS IN UKRAINE

2021 ◽  
Vol 75 (2) ◽  
pp. 52-59
Author(s):  
Victoria Shekhovtsova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
The State ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Property Right ◽  
Intellectual Property Right ◽  
Creative Activity ◽  
The Right ◽  
Intellectual Potential

The article is devoted to the research of the intellectual property rights system in Ukraine. Intellectual property is the result of the creative activity of any person or group of people. The author studied the categories «intellectual property» and «intellectual property right», investigated the principles of intellectual property and the system of intellectual property rights of Ukraine. In Roman law, there was the term «property», because the «property right» in its classical meaning was formed in Rome, and related to private relationships. Intellectual property is the property of a person that arose as a result of her creativity. However, for our Ukrainian legislation, the expression «intellectual property» is «terra incognita». Yes, intellectual property is studied by such branch legal sciences as: civil law, administrative law, international law, and others. Formed the State Service of Intellectual Property, but the organization of the state system of legal protection of intellectual property, in our difficult times, wants a better one. In the legal literature on intellectual property issues various definitions of «intellectual property right» are given. From a subjective point of view – this is a subjective right, and from an objective point of view – a civil law institute, a set of legal norms that regulate relations in the system of creation and protection of intellectual property. Man, his freedom and rights are the most important value of evolutionary development of society, which manifests itself in the growth of the intellectual potential of the population of each country. Only man possesses intelligence, creative potential and creative abilities. In addition to it, on earth, no living creature can create. Creative activity is the most important aspect of human life, which allows you to convey your talent to society. The consequence of this activity is something new, unique, unique and original. The accumulated products of the human mind are the heritage of the nation, which determine its further development.The Constitution of Ukraine guarantees to the citizens of the state freedom of scientific, artistic, literary and technical creativity, protection of intellectual property rights, moral and material interests arising in connection with various types of intellectual activity. Every citizen has the right to the results of his intellectual, creative activity; no one can use or distribute them without his consent, with the exception of the statutory provisions. The intellectual potential of the nation, in the form of improving education, production, culture, science and technology, needs constant support from our state. The Civil Code of Ukraine for the first time in our national legislation was given a formal definition of the right of intellectual property, as the rights of the individual to the result of intellectual, creative activity or other object of intellectual property rights.

CONSTITUTIONAL AND TRANSLATIVE ACQUISITION OF RIGHTS IN THE CONTEXT OF THE DOCTRINE OF OWNERSHIP TRANSFER

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Myroslava Hudyma ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Property Right ◽  
Legal Capacity ◽  
Close Attention ◽  
Ownership Transfer ◽  
The Right ◽  
Qualitative Characteristics

Within the framework of the general doctrine of constitutive and translational acquisition of rights, the publication made an attempt to identify their suitability for describing the phenomenon of ownership transfer. The general characteristics of translational and constitutive acquisition of rights are analyzed, their differences are highlighted, and it is emphasized that the specified types can cover such legal situations as full transfer of the right (the right as a whole), and transfer of a part of powers (as components of the certain right). The paper underlines that the differences between the types of acquisition of rights are not so much quantitative (one jurisdiction or their complex is transferred), as qualitative characteristics and such issues are especially relevant in the spectrum of research on the transfer of ownership as a right that includes a triad of powers. Close attention is paid to the construction of constitutive acquisition of right, the possibility of use of which is extremely controversial, due to the overwhelming denial of the correctness of separation and alienation of a separate authority from ownership right, because the approval of the latter will lead to theoretical dissonance on the existence of incomplete (split ownership). It is emphasized that the application of the construction of the transfer of authority can take place in different shades of meaning and be combined with the right alienation, and without it. Therefore, the construction of right granting without alienation of the right is quite viable. Moreover, the transfer of one or even several powers of the owner is not only practically possible, but also necessary to establish limited property rights on the basis of full property right (ownership right). However, it is noted that in these cases, the acquirer will not receive the right of the alienator as a whole, but only certain legal possibilities of behavior in relation to a particular good. The legal capacity of the acquirer will not coincide with the legal capabilities of the alienator in content and scope, and therefore to talk about the transfer of ownership is incorrect, only a certain authority (powers) of the owner will be transferred, provided its (their) separation admissibility. The paper concludes that the specifics of property rights, which forms a triad of indivisible powers, determines the possibility of applying the construction «transfer of ownership» only to cases of translational acquisition of right, in which the acquirer receives a right identical to the right of the grantor both in content and volume.

Part I The Nature of Intangible Property, 7 Intellectual Property

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Smith Marcus ◽  
Leslie Nico
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Industrial Design ◽  
Property Right ◽  
Moral Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Right ◽  
Confidential Information ◽  
The Right

This chapter examines intellectual property. The governing principles relating to intellectual property are very different from the principles that underlie other choses, like rights under contracts or debts. Like shares, intellectual property rights are characterized by specific statutory rules relating to their creation, as well as to their transfer. Intellectual property rights can be divided under six heads: patents; copyright; moral rights; industrial design rights; trademarks; and confidential information. In each case, the holder of the right is able—by virtue of ownership—to prevent others from doing what they otherwise could do. Each of these intellectual property rights has four different aspects: the intellectual property right itself; rights of action for infringement; validity challenges; and licensing.

Research on Readjustments of Land Property Rights in Comprehensive Land Management

2014 ◽  
Vol 484-485 ◽  
pp. 488-492
Author(s):  
Yi Liu ◽  
Xin Ju Li
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Land Management ◽  
Economic Benefits ◽  
Analysis Method ◽  
Ecological Benefits ◽  
Project Area ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Right ◽  
Rural Construction ◽  
Land Property Rights

Research purpose: The paper studies readjustments of land property rights which practice in the project area of Fan Zhen comprehensive land management in Taian City. According to the study make reasonable suggestions, for the similar areas of readjustments of land property rights provide experience. Research Methods: Investigating method and contrastive analysis method. Results: The right of the project area to an adjustment measures properly, and has achieved good economic benefits, social benefits and ecological benefits. Research Conclusions: Developing the new rural construction the problem from the social, economic and environmental field, effectively protect the fundamental interests of farmers to get sustainable development.

scholarly journals On the question of forms and types of property rights in civil law

2020 ◽  
Vol 80 (4) ◽  
pp. 62-67
Author(s):  
Zh. Talipova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Common Property ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Comprehensive Analysis ◽  
The State ◽  
Property Relations ◽  
Territorial Unit ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Legal Concepts ◽  
The Right

The right of ownership, like property itself, occupies one of the main places in public life. Statutory regulation of property relations in the Republic of Kazakhstan existed throughout the entire period of statehood formation. Today, property relations are regulated by the norms of various branches of law. But civil law regulation occupies one of the most important places in the system of regulatory regulation. This article deals with a comprehensive analysis of the main legal concepts, such as property, owner, subject of property rights, as well as forms and types of property, the grounds for the emergence and termination of property rights and ways to protect and protect the absolute right of the owner. A certain thing may belong to several persons as common property. In this case, the right of ownership is distributed among several owners (co-owners). The totality of legal norms on common property forms the institution of common property law. The purpose of this work is a comprehensive analysis of the main legal concepts, such as property, owner and subject of property rights, as well as forms and types of property, the basis for the emergence and termination of property rights and the definition of ways to protect and protect the absolute right of the owner. The means of achieving this goal is the study of the works of Kazakh legal scholars, the study of the analysis of practical materials. The article uses the following methods: comparative-legal, system-structural, formal-logical, as well as the method of system analysis. The legislation of Kazakhstan provides for two subjects of State property that have the right to act on their own behalf: the Republic of Kazakhstan as a whole (in respect of property constituting republican property) and the administrative – territorial unit (in respect of property constituting municipal property). That is, in civil circulation, data are carriers of state property rights. Depending on the tasks performed, the State exercises the powers of the owner on behalf of one of the specified entities. The Republic of Kazakhstan and the administrative-territorial unit are not legal entities. However, unless otherwise provided by legislative acts, they are subject to the rules governing the participation of legal entities in relations regulated by civil law. The state and administrative-territorial unit, as special subjects, have all the rights of subjects of civil legal relations and are limited in legal personality only by the current legislation.

scholarly journals Z PROBLEMATYKI PRZEKSZTAŁCENIA PRAWA UŻYTKOWANIA WIECZYSTEGO W PRAWO WŁASNOŚCI

2017 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 63
Author(s):  
Adam Brzozowski
Keyword(s):  
Local Governments ◽  
Current System ◽  
Common Knowledge ◽  
Rational Solution ◽  
Status Quo ◽  
The State ◽  
Property Right ◽  
Special Cases ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Right

From the Problems of a Transformation from Perpetual Usufruct to Property RightSummaryAn analysis of a normative state and a practice of a conduct of legal transactions with reference to legal regulations of perpetual usufruct and also of a transformation of this right into property right permits a statement that in Polish Law there came into being a system of norms completely unintelligible, excessively complicated, internally contradictory, bureaucratic and too costly for the national budget, local governments and perpetual usufructuaries. The primary cause of the status quo was the lack of a clearly defined objective at which the legislator was aiming. Expediency was implemented at the expense of system principles. It led to interventions of the Constitutional Tribunal. The legislator hedged, made successive provisions not only internally contradictory but also arousing new doubts as to their compliance with the Constitution of the Republic of Poland.It seems that the only rational solution of the status quo is to forego the right of perpetual usufruct by enfranchising perpetual usufructuaries. However, it has to be a regulation based on foundations completely different than these hitherto existing.The transformation should cover all perpetual usufructuaries, regardless of the mode and the time of their acquisition of this right, and should ensue ex lege. This would result in a significant simplification of a construction of the transformation. Given a tremendous interest of perpetual usufructuaries in the transformation, it would significantly reduce the amount of office labour and attendant costs incurred by them. At the same time affranchisement would become universal. Further simplification and lowering costs of transformation would require that entries in mortgage registers should be evidenced ex officio at the time of the first transaction relating to a given mortgage register. Since affranchisement in a discussed mode would cover all perpetual usufructuaries ex lege, it would be obvious that persons evidenced in a register as perpetual usufructuaries are property owners until a new entry is made.There should be no exception from the basic principle of universality of affranchisement of perpetual usufructuaries. It has to be assumed that land charged with perpetual usufruct has not been indispensable for the hitherto existing owner (the State Treasury, local government units) in order to perform their basic tasks. In special cases these units may employ an expropriation.The most difficult problem of the hitherto existing regulations faced has been the question of compensation due to hitherto owners from the fact of a loss of ownership as a result of a transformation. I propose to regulate these settlements in such a way that an enfranchised perpetual usufructuary should be charged with such performances as he was charged with hitherto as a perpetual usufructuary. In other words: he would be charged with an obligation to pay annuity during a period for which he has been granted, the right to perpetual usufruct, transformed into property right. In exchange for a performance, which in any case he would have to provide as per agreement, the former perpetual usufructuary would obtain a better right - property right. According to the proposition under discussion, the regulation would have a system character, in a long-term it would allow to effect such a reform of public finances that hitherto existing owners could perform their assigned tasks financing them from performances of a tribute type, and not from perpetual usufruct. One would have to consider the advisability of maintaining in force the principles of determining an amount of an annuity. It seems that instead of the current system (expensive and inefficient) there should be introduced a principle of a yearly raising of annuity according to a rate of inflation.It’s common knowledge that appreciable part of immovables of the State Treasury and municipal immovables originate from different kinds of „expropriations” carried out in the period of PRL [People’s Republic of Poland]. To secure claims of former owners I propose to create a special fund, meant for indemnities satisfying these claims, from obligatory written off amounts gained from receipts from former perpetual usufructuaries.

scholarly journals Criminal Accountability Against Illegal Civil Servant Salary Receipt in Criminal Acts of Corruption

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 99-116
Author(s):  
Arif Suhartono ◽  
H.M. Said Karim ◽  
Marwati Riza
Keyword(s):  
Civil Servant ◽  
The State ◽  
Civil Servants ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Civil State ◽  
Legal Proceedings ◽  
State Apparatus ◽  
The Right ◽  
To Receive ◽  
Laws And Regulations

The current study draws attention to analyze the right to salary of Civil Servant (PNS) undergoing legal proceedings and to analyze the qualifications of criminal act of corruption within the scope of the State Civil Apparatus. This study was an empirical legal research. The findings showed that the right to salary and benefits of Civil Servant undergoing legal proceedings was regulated in Article 281 of Law No. 11 of 2017 concerning Management of Civil State Apparatus that Civil Servant who were temporary dismissed due to detention of a suspect shall not be entitled to receive salary, but shall receive temporary dismissal pay. The amount of temporary dismissal pay is 50% (fifty percent) of the last salary as civil servant before being temporary dismissed in accordance with the laws and regulations. Temporary dismissal pay shall be received in the following month since the stipulation the temporary dismissal. On this basis, a comprehensive regulation is needed relating to supervisory oversight mechanism who made an omission against her subordinate civil servants who have committed disciplinary violations, especially those who were suspected of committing criminal act.

scholarly journals EUROPEANIZATION AND RECODIFICATION. USUFRUCT

2021 ◽  
pp. 40
Author(s):  
R. Maydanyk ◽  
◽  
N. Popova ◽  
N. Maydanyk ◽  
◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Operative Management ◽  
Property Right ◽  
Property Management ◽  
Economic Management ◽  
Legal Structure ◽  
Operational Management ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right

The article examines the features of usufruct in the European countries of Romano-Germanic law, determines the terms for the implementation in the Law of Ukraine of the best practice of usufruct in terms of Europeanization and Recodification. The peculiarities of usufruct in some countries of Romano-Germanic law, particularly in Germany, France, Poland, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Georgia, Moldova and Russia are studied. Usufruct, which is a flexible and universally recognized in the legal systems of Western Europe property right of personal possession for use, which is treated as an independent property right to another's property in the countries of Roman legal family or a kind of easement in the countries of German legal family, remains unknown to most countries – republics of the former Soviet Union. The law of Ukraine also does not provide for the institution of usufruct and regulates the relationship of long-term use of someone else's real estate through a number of limited property rights (emphyteusis, superficies, the right to economic management, the right to operational management) and obligational legal structures (usually land lease and property management). The authors came to the conclusion that it is necessary to introduce the institute of usufruct into the Ukrainian law by supplementing the Civil Code of Ukraine with a new chapter "Uzufruct", the framework provisions of which are proposed in this paper. In the law of Ukraine it is expedient to recognize usufruct as an independent, different from easement, real right of personal possession for use, which serves as a general provision on emphyteusis (the right to use someone else's land for agricultural purposes). In this regard, the provisions of Chapter 32 of the Civil Code of Ukraine on usufruct should be applied to relations under emphyteusis, unless otherwise provided by the provisions of the Central Committee on emphyteusis and does not follow from its essence. According to its purpose, the legal structure of the usufruct can perform any functions of personal possession for the use of another's property, which allows the use of this legal structure in any area of property use, regardless of whether the purpose is income or other socially useful result (charity, etc.). The absence of usufruct in the national law hinders the effective transformation of legal titles on a state and municipal property by waiving the right of economic management and the right of operative management in terms of recodification of the civil legislation, and does not promote formation of the full-fledged land market and its steady development in the terms of cancellation of the moratorium on sale of the agricultural lands, conducting commodity of agricultural production in Ukraine. Regarding the recodification and cancellation of the Commercial Code, usufruct is the most acceptable replacement of the right of economic management and the right of operative management. Along with long-term lease and property management, the usufruct is functionally similar to the right to economic management and the right to operational management. Unlike property management and lease, usufruct provides for paid or gratuitous use of property in the user's own interest (usufructuary), imperatively defined by law, the content of the rights of participants and a list of grounds for their termination under the rules of property rights.

Third Party Effects in Private Law

2020 ◽  
pp. 107-136
Author(s):  
Ben McFarlane ◽  
Andreas Televantos
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Property Right ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Private Law ◽  
Party Autonomy ◽  
Practical Operation ◽  
Different Types ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right

This chapter identifies and explores a core task of private law: to determine “third party effects” of transactions. We ask to what extent an A–B transaction may affect C, a party who enters into a subsequent transaction with A, or otherwise interferes with the right claimed by B. We show first that such third party effects are controlled not only by rules relating to legal property rights and equitable interests, but also by parts of the law of agency, of partnerships, and of tort. Secondly, whilst a range of doctrines thus share this function of controlling third party effects, it is important to distinguish between the precise legal form used by each doctrine. Thirdly, we argue that even when considering one particular form, such as that of a legal property right, third party effect is determined by the interaction of different types of rules, with the practical operation of one type of rule modified by the application of a different type. For this reason, attention must be paid to the interaction between the different forms used to govern third party effect. There is a question as to whether the law in this area is unduly complex, but we suggest that, so long as the range of forms tracks the diversity of ordinary transactions, private law usefully enhances party autonomy by offering parties these different means of casting their legal relations.

Constitutional basis for public property in the context of the creation of a legal entity of public law

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (5) ◽  
pp. 134-149
Author(s):  
Vladimir Nizov
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Historical Analysis ◽  
Public Law ◽  
The State ◽  
The Public ◽  
Public Property ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Difference ◽  
The Right

The article discusses problems of the constitutional regulation of property rights and property itself. The research has been narrowed down to the features of public property regulation in the Russian Federation. The relevance of the research is explained by the process of the reform in the public property administration in Russian Federation, which has transferring of the state property to some legal entities of public law as distinguished feature. The author proposes the historical analysis of the property regulation’s development and the role of the Constitution in this process. The comparative instruments are used to show the main preconditions and trends of public property regulation in Russia and other countries. The author argues the Russian Federation is going on the process of the property regulation construction and the modern stage sees the Constitution as a main axiological filter for that. Meanwhile, the Russian legal system has several obstacles in this way: the limitation of the direct force of the Constitution, the spoiled separation of power, etc. The importance of the system of the check and balances in the property administration is noted. Thus, the research explains the differences between the system of the separation of power in the United Kingdom, Ukraine, and Russia. The author discloses the distinguishing features of the public property the state needs to account in the process of the property transition to public law entities. The critic overview of detailed property regulation in the Constitution’s text is expressed. The author notes constitutional provisions that regulate property issues are features of the post-socialist states. The difference between property rights and sovereign rights is also enclosed in the article. The justification of the right to administrate public property is provided, the research explains the importance of the justification in public property administration and its role in democratic societies, especially in the Russian Federation. The privatization and decentralization of the public property administration are needed to be explained the effectiveness and stability of these decisions. Additionally, the author argues that public property must have more concrete regulation because it needs more complex rules for just and effective administration. The conclusion of the article explains the linkage between the constitutional ideal and the development of public property regulation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document