Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 6

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  usufruct
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
EN
The admissibility to renounce the perpetual usufruct can be deducted on the basis of the art. 233 of the Civil Code from the nature of this right and thus neither special regulation nor application of any other provision of the existing law are required. The essence of the perpetual usufruct, as a result from Article 233 of the Civil Code, means that it is permissible to renounce of a perpetual usufruct. There is no need to create a separate legal regulation on this matter or to refer to other legislation. Article 246 of the Civil Code shall apply accordingly to the perpetual usufruct. The renunciation of a perpetual usufruct is made to the owner by unilateral declaration of intent. In accordance with Art. 31 §1 of the Act of land register and mortgage, unilateral declaration of intent should be made in writing with a notarized signature. The statement of the landlord is not relevant. In accordance with Art. 246 §2 of the Civil Code, unilateral declaration of intent become effective when a perpetual usufruct is cancelled from a land register. As a consequence the perpetual usufruct is deemed to be expired. The extinction of a perpetual usufruct causes also expiry of ownership right to the buildings and structures erected on the land or purchased and other’s burden
PL
W glosowanym wyroku poruszono problem zbywania uprawnienia do korzystania z rzeczy i pobierania z niej pożytków. Sąd Najwyższy oparł swoje rozstrzygnięcie na dwóch założeniach. Po pierwsze, uprawnienie do korzystania z rzeczy i pobierania z niej pożytków naturalnych jest samoistnym przedmiotem obrotu prawnego (por. art. 252 i 693 § 1 k.c.) i może na podstawie umowy przysługiwać innej osobie niż właścicielowi, w szczególności użytkownikowi (a także użytkownikowi wieczystemu) lub dzierżawcy. Po drugie, może też być wiele osób, które są związane odpowiednimi stosunkami wynikającymi z umowy, z których ostatnia jest uprawniona do pobierania pożytków naturalnych (np. właściciel nieruchomości ustanawia użytkowanie na rzecz określonej osoby, która tę nieruchomość wydzierżawia innej osobie, a ta oddaje ją w poddzierżawę). O nabyciu własności tych pożytków decyduje przy tym w zasadzie istnienie odpowiedniego uprawnienia, a nie faktyczne posiadanie rzeczy macierzystej w chwili odłączenia, chyba że rzecz ta znajduje się w posiadaniu innej niż uprawniony osoby w dobrej wierze.
EN
The main problem of judgment of the Supreme Court dated 27 May 2015 is disposing of the right to use things and usufruct. The Supreme Court based its decision on two assumptions. Firstly, the right to the use of things and natural usufruct is autonomous traded law (see. Art. 252 and 693 § 1 of the Civil Code), and may contractually entitled to a person other than the owner, in particular the user (and perpetual user) or tenant. There can also be a whole range of people who are bound by appropriate relations under the contract and the last one in the series is entitled to receive the natural usufruct (eg. The property owner sets use for a particular person, that this property leased to another person, and this gives it in sublet). The acquisition of ownership of these usufruct determined by the essentially legal status – the existence of a privilege, not an actual possession of the main things at the time of disconnection, unless this thing is in the possession of non-authorized persons in good faith.
EN
This paper presents the principles forming the basis for the present model of the organization of allotment gardens in Poland and their constitutional evaluation as it was presented by the Constitutional Tribunal in its judgments relating to the Act of 6 May 1981 on Workers’ Allotment Gardens and the Act of 8 July 2005 on the Family Allotment Gardens. On the basis of the conclusions of the decisions of the Constitutional Tribunal contesting the constitutionality of several provisions of the current law, the author distinguishes key issues for the future regulation concerning allotments and presents his conclusions de lege ferenda in this regard.
EN
Pactum advitalitium was an early Polish legal institution established through a marital agreement. It was a form of annuity by means of which spouses established a right of usufruct of the entirety of an estate, effective upon the passing of one spouse and existing for the lifetime of the beneficiary. The practical purpose thereof was to secure the material well-being of a widowed spouse, usually the wife, given not only that the legal system did not provide for commune marital property, as well as that there was no statutory spousal succession. Later, after the partitions of Commonwealth of Poland and Lithuania, the institution discussed herein was adopted by Austrian law and regulated in the newly enacted Austrian Civil Code (ABGB), with slight modifications enabling i.a. to encumber not only the whole estate or a part thereof, but also several assets of a future estate. Thus advitalitium had become available within the vast Austrian Empire, yet it did not gain a wide recognition among the nations of the Monarchy, remaining an infrequently used institution, which led to its repeal in 21st century. The very legal character of pactum advitalitium was and is still controversial, leading the academia to suggest multiple explanations of its nature, often varying significantly dependent on the subject of advitalitium in a specific case (the entirety of an estate or a part thereof or several assets). The authors aim to examine the origins and history of advitalitium regulation in early Polish and Austrian law in their historical context, later to recount the doctrinal concepts explaining its character. To pursue both there aims, historical and formal-dogmatic methods are employed. The authors then move on to discuss the possibility of reaching results identical or just similar to ones achieved by means of an advitalitium in modern Polish law, applying the formal-dogmatic method, to show that not only no comparable institution exists in Polish law nowadays but, moreover, that similar results cannot be achieved by applying instruments known to Polish law. Such analysis enables the authors to arrive at conclusions regarding the possible application of advitalitium as an instrument of estate planning in the context of modern family relationships, which could lead to the rediscovery thereof in modern legal systems.
EN
Ukrainian people have struggled for their independence throughout the history. One of such  periods of Ukrainian history is the period of Ukrainian Cossack state when Ukrainians tried to separate from the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth. At that time, the following sources of law were obliged: the Statute of Lithuania 1588, law books of Magdeburg Rights, Hetman statutes, Ukrainian customary law, and Russian legislation. As there was no uniformity in legal regulation, the necessity of codification arose. The result of the codification commission work was the act entitled “Rights, under which the Little Russian judges”. Among servitudes, “Rights” presented a few praedial and one personal servitude. The right to cross another’s land was taken from the Statute of Lithuania 1588. “Right” was the first act in Ukrainian legal history that regulated issues of praedial urban servitudes. The following servitudes were present in Cossack Hetmanate: the right to cross another’s land, the right to forbid building of the house above the determined altitude, the right of light (the right to demand unobstructed light access from the neighbor); the right to transfer rainwater from the roof to the neighbor’s land; the right to build the particular beam into the neighbor’s wall; the usufruct.
PL
Jednym z okresów historii narodu ukraińskiego jest okres Hetmańszczyzny, kiedy to naród ukraiński próbował wywalczyć niepodległość i oddzielić się od Rzeczypospolitej Obojga Narodów. Obowiązywały wówczas różne źródła prawa: Statut Litewski z 1588 roku, zbiory prawa magdeburskiego, akty prawne Hetmana, prawo ukraińskie zwyczajowe i prawodawstwo rosyjskie. Ze względu na brak jednolitości w uregulowaniu podobnych stosunków prawnych, nastąpiła potrzeba kodyfikacji prawa. Wynikiem pracy komisji był akt zatytułowany Prawa, według których sądzi się naród małorosyjski. Wśród służebności Prawa wskazują kilka służebności gruntowych i jedną osobistą - prawo użytkowania. Normy o prawie przejścia po cudzym gruncie były bezpośrednio zapożyczone ze Statutu Litewskiego z 1588 roku. Prawa po raz pierwszy w historii ukraińskiego prawa regulują zagadnienie służebności gruntów miejskich. W Hetmanacie istniały następujące służebności: prawo przejścia po cudzym gruncie, prawo zakazujące wznoszenia budynku ponad określoną wysokość, prawo żądania, aby sąsiad w jakikolwiek sposób nie przeszkadzał dostępowi do światła, prawo do odprowadzania deszczówki na grunt służebny za zgodą sąsiada, prawo wpuszczania poszczególnych belek w ścianę sąsiada, użytkowanie.
EN
In this paper the terminology concerning the usufruct and easement in Poland and China was compared. The research material was the second book of the Polish Civil Code (promulgated on 23th April 1965) and the Chinese Property Rights Law (promulgated on 16th March 2007). To conduct the study the method of comparison of comparable texts was applied. In many cases it is possible to use functional equivalents from legal acts for examined terms. However, some terms have different ranges of meaning or the terms are non-equivalent and then applying, for instance, descriptive equivalents, is necessary.
PL
W artykule porównana została terminologia dotycząca użytkowania oraz służebności w Polsce i w Chinach. Materiał badawczy stanowiła księga druga ustawy z dn. 23 kwietnia 1964 r. – Kodeks cywilny (Dz. U. z 1964 r. Nr 16, poz. 93) oraz 中华人民共和国物权法, Zhōnghuá rénmín gònghéguó wùquánfǎ – Ustawa o prawach rzeczowych Chińskiej Republiki Ludowej, ogłoszona dekretem Prezydenta ChRL nr 62 z dn. 16 marca 2007 r. Do przeprowadzenia badania zastosowana została metoda analizy tekstów porównywalnych. Dla badanych terminów w wielu przypadkach użyć można ekwiwalentów funkcjonalnych, które odnaleźć można w ustawach. Niektóre terminy mają jednak różny zakres znaczeniowy, bądź są to terminy bezekwiwalentowe i konieczne jest zastosowanie m.in. ekwiwalentów opisowych.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.