DOCSLIB.ORG

Establishment by Virtue of the Law of Land Easement with the Content Corresponding to Transmission Easement in the Light of T

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Establishment by Virtue of the Law of Land Easement with the Content Corresponding to Transmission Easement in the Light of T Anna Maria Barańska ORCID: 0000-0001-7312-3587 Jagiellonian University DOI: 10.19195/1733-5779.29.16 Establishment by virtue of the law of land easement with the content corresponding to transmission easement in the light of the resolution of the Supreme Court of June 5, 2018, in case III CZP 50/17 JEL Classification: K11 Keywords: land easement, transmission easement, state-owned company, transmission company Słowa kluczowe: służebność gruntowa o treści odpowiadającej służebności przesyłu, uwłaszcze- nie, przedsiębiorstwo państwowe, przedsiębiorstwo przesyłowe Abstract: The subject of this article is the resolution of the enlarged composition of the Supreme Court of 5 June 2018, which resolves the issue of acquiring by land easement with content corre- sponding to transmission easement together with the acquisition by a state-owned company of trans- mission facilities developed on State Treasury properties. As a result of granting property rights to state-owned companies of state property in the early 1990s, the ownership of transmission infra- structure and the property on which they were situated were separated. In the judicature, divergent concepts emerged regarding the solution of the issue of further use of this land by transmission companies. According to the first one, the transfer of property rights was accompa- nied by the creation by law of land easement with content corresponding to a transmission easement. On the other hand, according to the second concept, obtaining a legal title for further use of the property was possible only through contractual acquisition or prescription of transmission easement. Powstanie z mocy prawa służebności gruntowej o treści odpowiadającej służebności przesyłu w świetle uchwały Sądu Najwyższego z dnia 5 czerwca 2018 roku, sygn. akt III CZP 50/17 Abstrakt: Tematem artykułu jest uchwała powiększonego składu Sądu Najwyższego z dnia 5 czerwca 2018 roku, która rozstrzyga kwestię nabycia z mocy prawa służebności gruntowej Studenckie Prace Prawnicze, Administratywistyczne i Ekonomiczne 29 Studenckie Prace Prawnicze, Administratywistyczne i Ekonomiczne 29, 2019 © for this edition by CNS SPPAiE29.indb 227 08.01.2020 15:16:46 228 | AnnA MAriA BArAńskA o treści odpowiadającej służebności przesyłu wraz z nabyciem przez przedsiębiorstwo państwowe własności urządzeń przesyłowych posadowionych na nieruchomościach Skarbu Państwa. W wyniku uwłaszczenia mienia państwowego na początku lat dziewięćdziesiątych ubiegłego wieku doszło do rozdzielenia własności infrastruktury przesyłowej oraz nieruchomości, na której były one posado- wione. W judykaturze pojawiły się rozbieżne koncepcje odnośnie do rozwiązania kwestii dalszego korzystania przez przedsiębiorstwa przesyłowe z tych gruntów. Zgodnie z pierwszą z nich przenie- sieniu prawa własności towarzyszyło powstanie z mocy prawa służebności gruntowej o treści odpo- wiadającej służebności przesyłu. Na podstawie drugiej — uzyskanie tytułu prawnego do dalszego korzystania z nieruchomości było możliwe wyłącznie w drodze umownego nabycia albo zasiedzenia służebności przesyłu. Introduction Despite more than a decade since the introduction of the transmission easement to the Civil Code, the use of land easement with content corresponding to the easement of transmission still raises numerous controversies. One of the issues that arose from the interpretation of this concept was the question of the possi- bility of acquiring by virtue of law land easement with content corresponding to transmission easement together with the acquisition by a state-owned company of the ownership of transmission facilities located on State Treasury properties. This issue was definitely resolved by the recent resolution of the seven Supreme Court judges of 5 June 2018,1 answering the question whether acquisition by the transmission company of transmission facilities located on properties owned by the State Treasury on the basis of the Act of 20 December 1990 on the amend- ment of the Act on State-owned Companies,2 resulted in the acquisition by the transmission company by virtue of law — as a right related to the ownership of such equipment — land easement with content corresponding to transmission easement, encumbering those properties. Although the Supreme Court’s response ultimately seems quite intuitive, in the period preceding the adoption of the resolution the discrepancies in the jurispru- dence, weakening its consistency and predictability were widely visible. Facts The discussed legal issue was transferred to the enlarged composition of the Supreme Court as a result of examining a cassation complaint in a case in which the applicant demanded that his property should be encumbered with a paid trans- mission easement for the benefit of the participant in the proceedings — Polskie Sieci Elektroenergetyczne S.A. The participant, on the other hand, defended 1 Decision of the Supreme Court of 5 June 2018, in case III CZP 50/17, Legalis no. 1779436. 2 Act of 20 December 1990 amending the act on state-owned enterprises and amending certain other acts, Official Journal 1990 No. 2, item 6. Studenckie Prace Prawnicze, Administratywistyczne i Ekonomiczne 29, 2019 © for this edition by CNS SPPAiE29.indb 228 08.01.2020 15:16:46 ESTABLISHMENT BY VIRTUE OF THE LAW OF LAND EASEMENT | 229 himself with charge of acquisitive prescription of transmission easement (or land easement with content corresponding to transmission easement). The District Court determined that the property covered by the application remained state-owned property since the development of transmission facilities until 15 July 1993. Taking into account the claim, the Court indicated that the period of acquisitive prescription had not yet elapsed due to the fact that during the period of uniform state ownership the usucaption of land easement (with con- tent corresponding to easement of transmission) by the state-owned company was excluded in the case of facilities located on state-owned land. As a consequence, the course of the usucaption period began only on 15 July 1993, when the property was sold to the applicant, thus ceasing to be owned by the State Treasury. The Court of Appeal hearing the case as a result of the participant’s appeal deliberated, however, whether the recognition of the allegation of acquisitive pre- scription of land easement with content corresponding to transmission easement does not need to be preceded by an assessment as to whether the entity raising such an allegation no longer has a legal title to use the property in question. The creation of such a title by virtue of law on the day when the state-owned enter- prise acquired the ownership of the transmission facility would render the appli- cation to establish the transmission easement unjustified. The previous position of judicature and doctrine In the period preceding the adoption of the resolution of 5 June 2018, the above-mentioned issue was the subject of discrepancies not only in the case law of common courts, but also in the decisions of the Supreme Court. In some judg- ments, the Supreme Court took the position that due to ownership transforma- tions in the 1990s, a state-owned enterprise acquiring ownership of transmission facilities also automatically acquired the right to further use of the property on which they were located. At the same time, in other cases, it approved the view that acquisitive prescription of land easement with content corresponding to the easement of transmission by a state enterprise (or its legal successors) is possible on land owned by the State Treasury, starting from the day of enfranchisement. However, due to the fact that the possession of a legal title to the property pre- vents the commencement of the course of acquisitive prescription, these theses are clearly contradictory. The first of the evoked jurisprudence line was initiated by the decisions of the Supreme Court of 12 May 2016.3 It was explained in them that with the abolition — as of 1 February 1989 — of the construction of a single state property, there was no automatic transformation of the rights of state legal persons to the part of national 3 Decision of the Supreme Court of 12 May 2016 in case IV CSK 509/15, Legalis no. 1488827; Decision of the Supreme Court of 12 May 2016 in case IV CSK 510/15, Legalis no. 1472995. Studenckie Prace Prawnicze, Administratywistyczne i Ekonomiczne 29, 2019 © for this edition by CNS SPPAiE29.indb 229 08.01.2020 15:16:46 230 | AnnA MAriA BArAńskA property remaining in their management. Only on 5 December 5 1990, based on Art. 2 para. 1 and 2 of the Act of 29 September 1990 amending the act on land management and expropriation of real estate,4 the right of the management with respect to land in the right of perpetual usufruct has been transformed into land and buildings ownership. However, in relation to other property components, including transmission facilities, the transformation into ownership took place on 7 January 1991, pursuant to the provision of Art. 1 point 9 of the Act of 20 December 1990 amending the Act on state enterprises. Under this provision, there was an amendment to Art. 42 para. 2 of the Act of 25 January 1981 on state-owned enterprises5 by de- leting from its content the words “forming part of a nationwide property.” Since then, the property of state-owned enterprises has ceased to form part of nationwide property. Subsequently, the Supreme Court came to the conclusion that the state-owned enterprise, which included transmission facilities developed on real estates owned by the State
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Real Estate Law Review Real Estate Law Review
    the Real Estate Law Review Law Real Estate Real Estate Law Review Seventh Edition Editor John Nevin Seventh Edition lawreviews © 2018 Law Business Research Ltd Real Estate Law Review Seventh Edition Reproduced with permission from Law Business Research Ltd ThisTh article was first published in March 2018 For further information please contact [email protected] Editor John Nevin lawreviews © 2018 Law Business Research Ltd PUBLISHER Tom Barnes SENIOR BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT MANAGER Nick Barette BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT MANAGERS Thomas Lee, Joel Woods ACCOUNT MANAGERS Pere Aspinall, Sophie Emberson, Laura Lynas, Jack Bagnall PRODUCT MARKETING EXECUTIVE Rebecca Mogridge RESEARCHER Arthur Hunter EDITORIAL COORDINATOR Gavin Jordan HEAD OF PRODUCTION Adam Myers PRODUCTION EDITOR Claire Ancell SUBEDITOR Gina Mete CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER Paul Howarth Published in the United Kingdom by Law Business Research Ltd, London 87 Lancaster Road, London, W11 1QQ, UK © 2018 Law Business Research Ltd www.TheLawReviews.co.uk No photocopying: copyright licences do not apply. The information provided in this publication is general and may not apply in a specific situation, nor does it necessarily represent the views of authors’ firms or their clients. Legal advice should always be sought before taking any legal action based on the information provided. The publishers accept no responsibility for any acts or omissions contained herein. Although the information provided is accurate as of February 2018, be advised that this is a developing area. Enquiries
    [Show full text]
  • The Moral Paradox of Adverse Possession: Sovereignty and Revolution in Property Law Larissa Katz
    Document generated on 10/01/2021 12:15 p.m. McGill Law Journal Revue de droit de McGill The Moral Paradox of Adverse Possession: Sovereignty and Revolution in Property Law Larissa Katz Volume 55, Number 1, March 2010 Article abstract On what grounds can we justify the transformation of squatters into owners? URI: https://id.erudit.org/iderudit/039836ar To understand the moral significance of adverse possession, the author DOI: https://doi.org/10.7202/039836ar proposes an analogy. Much of the moral analysis of adverse possession has proceeded on the basis that adverse possessors are land thieves. The author See table of contents first explains why the analogy of adverse possessor to land thief is misleading. Then, she argues that there is a much closer analogy between adverse possession and revolution or, more precisely, a bloodless coup d’état. The Publisher(s) recognition of the adverse possessor’s (private) authority solves the moral problem created by an agendaless object just as the recognition of the existing McGill Law Journal / Revue de droit de McGill government’s (public) authority, whatever its origin, solves the moral problem of a stateless people. The morality of adverse possession, seen this way, does ISSN not turn on any particularized evaluation of the squatter’s deserts or her uses of the land. The author thus does not propose that adverse possession is 0024-9041 (print) justified in the same way that some argue a conscientious revolutionary is 1920-6356 (digital) justified in resisting an oppressive or otherwise unjust sovereign. Rather, the morality of adverse possession is found where we might least expect it: in its Explore this journal positivist strategy of ratifying the claims to authority of a squatter without regard to the substantive merits of her agenda or her personal virtue.
    [Show full text]
  • Continuous and Apparent Easement
    Continuous And Apparent Easement tristichicSickening Westleigh Spencer smilingsolaces, some his sleeving tracing soled removably! ballyrag uphill. Levon grangerizing imaginably. Imputable and He and continuous, our service provides information in various types of dismemberments of setbacks and her. Article 615 Easements may be continuous or discontinuous apparent or nonapparent Continuous easements are deficient the order of which discourage or. Any pet who is not wish to contribute may exempt loan by renouncing the easement for the below of the others. Easements Neighborhood and daily of way Notaries of France. An apparent by continuing to establish in no feasible method of lands are there was retained an office or impliedly granted for instance, listing all three descriptions referred to. Fourthly, maintain, represent the petitioner to inquire is the relatives of Maria Florentino as evidence when she died. Can he was held to meet this type is apparent sign, whose use may be found on private use made apparent easement? Purchasers of severance; minority require help they benefit of dominant tenement from being interests in determining implication, if your profile web property interest in efficiently handling varied. British Columbia, which service became really true easement upon which death. 192 the court observed that An easement is harsh if its existence is indicated by signs which might be seen him known right a careful inspection by an person ordinarily conversant with human subject The award further observed that A continuous or apparent easement is either a curtain or enjoyed by means declare a fixture. When necessity are necessary to determine whether a declaratory judgment, or necessary for excessive use requirements of aqueduct for.
    [Show full text]
  • The Real Estate Law Review
    [ Exclusively for: Eddy Leks | 04-Apr-14, 08:41 AM ] ©The Law Reviews The Real Estate Law Review Third Edition Editor David Waterfield Law Business Research The Real Estate Law Review Reproduced with permission from Law Business Research Ltd. This article was first published in The Real Estate Law Review, 3rd edition (published in March 2014 – editor David Waterfield). For further information please email [email protected] The Real Estate Law Review Third Edition Editor David Waterfield Law Business Research Ltd THE LAW REVIEWS THE MERGERS AND ACQUISITIONS REVIEW THE RESTRUCTURING REVIEW THE PRIVATE COMPETITION ENFORCEMENT REVIEW THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION REVIEW THE EMPLOYMENT LAW REVIEW THE PUBLIC COMPETITION ENFORCEMENT REVIEW THE BANKING REGULATION REVIEW THE INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION REVIEW THE MERGER CONTROL REVIEW THE TECHNOLOGY, MEDIA AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS REVIEW THE INWARD INVESTMENT AND INTERNATIONAL TAXATION REVIEW THE CORPORATE GOVERNANCE REVIEW THE CORPORATE IMMIGRATION REVIEW THE INTERNATIONAL INVESTIGATIONS REVIEW THE PROJECTS AND CONSTRUCTION REVIEW THE INTERNATIONAL CAPITAL MARKETS REVIEW THE REAL ESTATE LAW REVIEW THE PRIVATE EQUITY REVIEW THE ENERGY REGULATION AND MARKETS REVIEW THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY REVIEW THE ASSET MANAGEMENT REVIEW THE PRIVATE WEALTH AND PRIVATE CLIENT REVIEW THE MINING LAW REVIEW THE EXECUTIVE REMUNERATION REVIEW THE ANTI-BRIBERY AND ANTI-CORRUPTION REVIEW THE CARTELS AND LENIENCY REVIEW THE TAX DISPUTES AND LITIGATION REVIEW THE LIFE SCIENCES LAW REVIEW THE INSURANCE AND REINSURANCE LAW
    [Show full text]
  • Ownership – Acquisition, Proof and Extinction
    Ownership Acquisition of ownership Modalities of Acquisition of Individual Ownership . Generally, the law recognizes two types/class of acquiring ownership: Original acquisition, and Derivative acquisition . Ownership is said to be acquired through original acquisition when an individual acquires ownership over a given thing by his own, without depending on anyone's title/ownership. Ownership may be acquires in this manner over a thing which: - has never been owned, res nullius - has had owner but abandoned, res derelictae - has owner, but the new owner doesn’t depend on the pre-existing OP as a source . Derivative acquisition refers to the acquisition of ownership through transfer of ownership. This is a case of buying/taking the right rather than establishing original ownership. It is a derivative mechanism of acquiring ownership. It requires juridical acts and is dependent on the quality of ownership of the original acquirer. Original Acquisition of Ownership . The CC recognizes 4 modes of original acquisition of OP: - Occupation - Possession in good faith - Usucaption - Accession . Some apply to acquisition of OP only on corporeal movables, others to immovable only & some for both. Acquisition of OP by Occupation . No clear definition of the term in the CC . From a systematic reading of Art 1151 we can describe Occupation as: a mode of acquiring OP whereby a person becomes an owner of a masterless corporeal chattel by taking possession of the thing with the intention of becoming owner. Thus, in order to become owner by occupation, the following elements must be fulfilled cumulatively: - The thing must be a corporeal movable - The thing must be susceptible of private appropriation - The thing must be masterless - The person must have taken possession of the thing - The possession must be with intention of becoming owner of the thing.
    [Show full text]
  • Patent Exhaustion Connects Common Law to Equity: Impression Products, Inc
    Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property Volume 17 Issue 1 Article 4 1-18-2018 Patent Exhaustion Connects Common Law to Equity: Impression Products, Inc. v. Lexmark International, Inc. Kumiko Kitaoka Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.kentlaw.iit.edu/ckjip Part of the Intellectual Property Law Commons Recommended Citation Kumiko Kitaoka, Patent Exhaustion Connects Common Law to Equity: Impression Products, Inc. v. Lexmark International, Inc., 17 Chi. -Kent J. Intell. Prop. 96 (2018). Available at: https://scholarship.kentlaw.iit.edu/ckjip/vol17/iss1/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarly Commons @ IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property by an authorized editor of Scholarly Commons @ IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. PATENT EXHAUSTION CONNECTS COMMON LAW TO EQUITY: IMPRESSION PRODUCTS, INC. V. LEXMARK INTERNATIONAL, INC. KUMIKO KITAOKA I. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................ 97 II. BACKGROUND .............................................................................. 101 A. Brief Summary of Impression Products ............................ 101 1. Facts and Procedural Highlights: Imported Modified Single-Use Printer Cartridges ................................... 101 2. The Federal Circuit: Territoriality and Patentees’ Freedom to Contract ................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Conceptual Foundations of Property Rights: Rethinking De Facto Rural Open Access to Common-Pool Resources in Ethiopia
    CONCEPTUAL FOUNDATIONS OF PROPERTY RIGHTS: RETHINKING DE FACTO RURAL OPEN ACCESS TO COMMON-POOL RESOURCES IN ETHIOPIA Elias N. Stebek ♣ Abstract This article, inter alia, attempts to highlight some major concepts and theories on property and the rationales and elements of property rights. It also briefly deals with the distinction between property rights on the stock of resources and its flows, and indicates the downsides of open access in the efficient utilization and sustainability of common-pool resources. Where de jure public property becomes de facto open access, certain common-pool resources in the rural areas of Ethiopia (such as forests) are exposed to encroachment, unlawful logging and overgrazing. The article attempts to show that it is usually impossible to effectively exclude persons from the use and overconsumption of common- pool resources in Ethiopia in the absence of well-defined and effectively implemented public property regime, or unless the property rights of indigenous communities and collectives such as peasant associations are duly recognized and clearly defined so that the right holders can have vested interest in the preservation, protection and development of these resources. Key words: Property rights, rural open-access, common property, public property, common-pool resources, Ethiopia. _____________ Introduction According to Article 40(3) of the Constitution of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia, “the right to ownership of rural and urban land, as well as natural resources is exclusively vested in the State and in the peoples of Ethiopia” and “shall not be subject to sale or to other means of exchange.” One of the fundamental issues that can be raised in relation to public property of rural land and natural resources is whether it has the impact of open access to a significant part of these resources.
    [Show full text]
  • Ownership Is Nine-Tenths of Possession: How Disparate Concepts of Ownership Influence Possession Doctrines
    OWNERSHIP IS NINE-TENTHS OF POSSESSION: HOW DISPARATE CONCEPTS OF OWNERSHIP INFLUENCE POSSESSION DOCTRINES Martin Hirschprung*† INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................... 143 I. PROPERTY AND POSSESSION .................................................................. 145 II. WHAT IS POSSESSION? .......................................................................... 147 III. POSSESSION FOR CULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS PROPERTIES .............. 149 IV. DOMINIUM........................................................................................... 151 V. STEWARDSHIP....................................................................................... 156 A. Stewardship and Religion ................................................................ 157 B. Stewardship and Jewish Law ........................................................... 158 VI. COMPARING ROMAN AND JEWISH LAW .............................................. 159 A. First Possession ............................................................................... 161 B. Adverse Possession .......................................................................... 164 C. Deathbed Bequests ........................................................................... 169 CONCLUSION ............................................................................................. 175 INTRODUCTION The concept of possession is central to property law.1 It is vital to establishing and providing evidence of ownership.2 However,
    [Show full text]
  • Land Conflicts and the Criminalization of Peasant Movements in Paraguay
    Land & Sovereignty T in the Americas N Issue Brief N°6 - 2014 I Land Conflicts and the Criminalization of Peasant Movements in Paraguay: The Case of Marina Kue and the “Curuguaty Massacre” by FIAN International & La Vía Campesina © 2014 by Food First / Institute for Food and Development Policy All rights reserved. Please obtain permission to copy. Food First / Institute for Food and Development Policy 398 60th Street, Oakland, CA 94618-1212 USA Tel (510) 654-4400 Fax (510) 654-4551 www.foodfirst.org [email protected] Transnational Institute (TNI) De Wittenstraat 25 1052 AK Amsterdam, Netherlands Tel (31) 20-6626608 Fax (31) 20-6757176 www.tni.org [email protected] Authored by: FIAN International Willy-Brandt-Platz 5, 69115 Heidelberg, Germany www.fian.org | [email protected] In collaboration with: La Vía Campesina www.viacampesina.org | [email protected] Cover and text design by Zoe Brent Cover photo by Hugo Valiente Translation from the original Spanish by Food First Edited by Tanya Kerssen Proofread by William Wroblewski This report is based on the preliminary findings of an international fact-finding mission, which carried out an independent investigation of the case of Marina Kue and human rights violations against peasant farmers, September 5-11, 2012. The delegation consisted of representatives of FIAN International; the Global Campaign for Agrarian Reform-Central America; the UNESCO Chair of the University of Catalonia, Spain; Real World Radio; Friends of the Earth International; and ANAMURI-Chile; accompanied by Paraguayan member organizations of La Vía Campesina. To contact the authors of this report, please email [email protected].
    [Show full text]
  • CHSH Guide to Real Estate & Construction Laws in Austria & CEE
    CHSH Guide to Real Estate & Construction Laws in Austria & CEE CHSH Austria Belarus Bulgaria Czech Republic Hungary Romania Slovak Republic Media owner and publisher: CHSH Cerha Hempel Spiegelfeld Hlawati Rechtsanwälte GmbH A-1010 Vienna, Parkring 2 Tel: +43 1 514 35 0 Email: offi[email protected] Although this brochure was created with the greatest of care, we nevertheless do not accept any responsibility or liability whatsoever for its content being correct, complete or up to date. www.chsh.com 1 CONTENT INTRODUCTION 3 AUSTRIA 5 BELARUS 17 BULGARIA 24 CZECH REPUBLIC 31 HUNGARY 39 ROMANIA 47 SLOVAK REPUBLIC 57 OUR OFFICES 68 CHSH Czech Republic CHSH Austria CHSH Slovak Republic CHSH Hungary CHSH Bulgaria CHSH Romania CHSH Belarus 3 All liabilities for damages (direct or in - direct) from the information provided are explicitly excluded. It is recommen - About ded that parties seek professional legal advice prior to any business transactions this involving real property. About CHSH Guide CHSH is one of Austria's leading corpo - rate law firms, with an integrated Central and Eastern European practice. With a This CHSH Guide to Real Estate and team of over 180 lawyers, we offer our Construction Laws in Austria and CEE clients expertise and experience in all shall give the reader a valuable insight areas of real estate and corporate and into real property law in select countries commercial law in Austria and Central of Central and Eastern Europe, where and Eastern Europe. we have offices. We have tried to compile an overview of those legal aspects in the At CHSH, we have a dedicated team of covered jurisdictions, which we think are experienced lawyers specialising in real the most attractive to foreign investors estate and construction in CEE, all of to get a feeling of the respective legal en - whom have in-depth expertise coupled vironment.
    [Show full text]
  • Book VII. Title XXVI. Concerning Prescription (Usucapion)
    Book VII. Title XXVI. Concerning prescription (usucapion) in consequence of purchase or compromise. (De usucapione pro emptore vel transactione.) Dig. 41.4. Headnote. Prescription. Prescription, in a general sense, means the extinction of rights by lapse of time. The prescription may be one through which title to property is acquired. In that case it is sometimes called acquisitive prescription; that is to say, title is acquired by adverse possession. There may also be extinctive prescription, which means that an obligation is extinguished through lapse of time, and such prescription is ordinarily referred to as limitation of action, and is particularly referred to in note to C. 7.39.3. To gain title by prescription was originally called usucapion or usucaption, and required an uninterrupted possession of one year in case of movables and an uninterrupted possession of two years for immovable property. But this principle applied (generally - Partsch 82) only to Italy, and was not applicable in the provinces. In the provinces (see Partsch 83) an uninterrupted possession of ten and twenty years came to be applied. Justinian abolished the difference, and left only the time applicable in the provinces. C. 7.31. This became the ordinary prescription, and was called the prescription of a long time (longi temporis praescriptio), which was ten years, if the parties were "present," that is to say, living in the same province (originally district), and twenty years, if the parties were "absent," that is to say, living in different provinces (originally district). C. 7.33.12; C. 7.35.7. Modified to 30 years, if brought in bad faith.
    [Show full text]
  • This Real Estate Investment Guide Offers an Overview of the Legal
    Real Estate Investment in the Slovak Republic THE LEGAL PERSPECTIVE REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT IN THE SLOVAK REPUBLIC Contents 1. OWNERSHIP OF REAL ESTATE 03 7.TAX 14 1.1 Full ownership 03 7.1 Transfer taxes 14 1.2 Other rights over real estate 03 7.2 Value added tax 14 1.3 Condominium 03 7.3 Other real estate taxes 14 1.4 Restrictions on ownership by foreigners 04 7.4 Taxation of rental income from real estate 15 2.ACQUISITIONOFOWNERSHIP 05 7.5 Taxation of dividends from a company owning real estate 15 2.1 Formal requirements 05 7.6 Taxation of capital gains on real estate 15 2.2 Registration 05 7.7 Taxation of capital gains from the disposal of 2.3 Asset deals 05 shares in a company owning real estate 15 2.4 Share deals 06 8.REALESTATEFINANCE 17 2.5 Public auctions 06 8.1 Assets held as security 17 3.OTHERRIGHTSTOPROPERTY 07 8.2 Further collateral agreements 17 3.1 Mortgages and charges 07 8.3 Fees on the creation of security 18 3.2 Easements 07 CONTACTS 19 3.3 Pre–emption rights 07 ABOUTDLAPIPER 19 3.4 Promise to sell/option agreements 07 4.ZONINGANDPLANNINGLAWPERMITS 09 5.ENVIRONMENTALLIABILITY 11 6.LEASES 12 6.1 Duration 12 6.2 Rent 12 6.3 Operating expenses 12 6.4 Maintenance, repair and renovation at lease termination 12 6.5 Assignment/transfers 12 6.6 Subleases 13 6.7 Termination 13 6.8 Sale of leased property 13 2 WWW.DLAPIPER.COM 1.
    [Show full text]