The subject of the article is the impact of the Supreme Court’s jurisprudence on the shaping of rights and obligations of co-owners in joint-ownership within an implied quoad usum agreement. The Supreme Court’s argumentation will be discussed, according to which an alteration of the sta-tutory regime of joint possession, if performed by the co-owners, entails modification of rights and obligations of the parties in terms of bearing burdens and deriving benefits from the property. Therefore, a question arises concerning the theoretical classification of the reasoning of the Su-preme Court. The purpose of the article is to demonstrate that the legal reasoning applied by the Supreme Court is based on two pre-sumptions, whereby the first refers to the potential will of co-owners, and the second is limiting it. Moreover, both structurally and functionally, this reasoning has similar characteristics to legal fiction.
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.