Protection of long-term land ownership: some problematic aspects
Abstract
The ability of Ukrainian current legislation and law enforcement practice to provide effective protection of the interests of titleless bona fide landowners was critically assessed. It is noted that the problems of the long-term owners’ interests protection should be solved in the scope of a more general problem, namely the protection of titleless ownership as such. Emphasis is placed on the need for autonomous formulation in the Civil Code of Ukraine of provisions on the protection of titleless ownership and possession of property based on law. This is due to the fact that these civil law institutions have a very different legal nature. The description of these institutions in the national legislation of Ukraine is highlighted, which will take into account the specifics of the legal regulation of relations on the actual ownership of property and increase the effectiveness of protection of the interests of titleless owners. The position of the highest courts of Ukraine on the extension of the regime of protection of real subjective rights to long-term ownership has been challenged. Attention is paid to the need for scientific substantiation of legislative expansion of the methods of protection of long-term land ownership. The current legislation of Ukraine allows the possibility of protecting the interests of long-term landowners only by filing a lawsuit to restore their de facto control over such property. Ways to protect against non-loss of property are not legally available to long-term landowners. It is emphasized that the possibility of satisfying the claims of the long-term owner to restore possession of the property must be linked to the condition of good faith conduct of such a plaintiff. The good faith conduct of the owner should be considered both at the time of establishment of possession and in relation to the subsequent circumstances of possession of the property. In particular, the owner of the property may know that he or she does not have a title to the property and even know who owns the property, but if the owner does not hide the fact of taking someone else's property and is willing to return the property to its owner, it should be considered bona fide.
Downloads
References
Huivan P.D., 2017. Ancient possession of property as a legal basis for acquiring property rights [Davnisne volodinnia mainom yak pravova pidstava nabuttia prava vlasnosti]. Naukovij vìsnik publìčnogo ta privatnogo prava – Scientific Journal of Public and Private Law, Iss. 1, pp. 36-42.
Ripenko A.I., 2013. Issues of protection of property rights to land in recent acts of judicial practice [Pytannia zakhystu rechovykh prav na zemelni dilianky v ostannikh aktakh sudovoi praktyky]. Pravo ì gromadânsʹke suspìlʹstvo, No. 4, pp. 49-63. Available at http://lcslaw.knu.ua/index.php/arkhiv-nomeriv/4-5-2013/item/download/60_97bb60498f8c971b043be88c2334b832 [Accessed 25 October 2021].
Makovii V.P., 2007. Acquisition prescription in civil law [Nabuvalna davnist u tsyvilnomu pravi]. Abstract of Ph.D. dissertation. Kharkiv National University of Internal Affairs.
Sievierova Ye.S., 2011. Acquisition prescription in the civil law of Ukraine: the question of application according to the case law [Nabuvalna davnist u tsyvilnomu pravi Ukrainy: pytannia zastosuvannia za materialamy sudovoi praktyky]. Naukovij vìsnik Užgorodsʹkogo nacìonalʹnogo unìversitetu. Serìâ Pravo – Uzhhorod National University Herald. Series: Law, Iss. 17, pp. 114-118.
Huivan P.D., 2017. Ancient possession of property as a legal basis for acquiring property rights [Davnisne volodinnia mainom yak pravova pidstava nabuttia prava vlasnosti]. Naukovij vìsnik publìčnogo ta privatnogo prava – Scientific Journal of Public and Private Law, Iss. 1, pp. 36-42.
Maidannyk R.A., 2019. Speech right [Rechove pravo]. Kyiv.
Kharchenko H.H., 2015. Property rights [Rechovi prava]. Kyiv.
Tsiura V.V., 2007. Real rights to another’s property [Rechovi prava na chuzhe maino]. Abstract of Ph.D. dissertation. Taras Shevchenko Kyiv National University.
Kharchenko H., 2019. Institute of Possession in Civil Law of Ukraine [Instytut volodinnia v tsyvilnomu pravi Ukrainy]. Pìdpriêmnictvo, gospodarstvo ì pravo – Entrepreneurship, Economy and Law, No. 10, pp. 38-43.
Khodyko Yu.Ye., 2020. Regarding the peculiarities of the legal regime of the object of possession [Shchodo osoblyvostei pravovoho rezhymu obiekta volodinnia]. Pravo ì suspìlʹstvo – Law and Society, No. 2, pp. 237-244.
Pliatsko U.M., 2015. Legal nature of possession [Pravova pryroda volodinnia]. Naukovij vìsnik Užgorodsʹkogo nacìonalʹnogo unìversitetu. Serìâ Pravo – Uzhhorod National University Herald. Series: Law, Iss. 35, Part 1, Vol. 2, pp. 11-14.
Belov V.A., 2015. Essays on property law. Scientific and polemical notes [Ocherki veshchnogo prava. Nauchno-polemicheskie zametki]. Moscow.
Sukhanov E.A., 2017. Property law: scientific and educational essay [Veshchnoe pravo: nauchno-poznavatel’nyi ocherk]. Moscow.
Sinitsyn S.A., 2012. Possession and possessory protection in the civil law of the states of continental Europe [Vladenie i vladel’cheskaya zashchita v grazhdanskom prave gosudarstv kontinental’noi Yevropy]. Moscow.
Badaeva N.V., 2005. Possession and possessory protection in foreign and Russian civil law [Vladenie i vladel’cheskaya zashchita v zarubezhnom i rossiiskom grazhdanskom prave]. Abstract of Ph.D. dissertation. Moscow.
Batchaev Yu.S., 2005. Protection of possession in Russian civil law [Zashchita vladeniya v rossiiskom grazhdanskom prave]. Abstract of Ph.D. dissertation. Krasnodar.
Spasybo-Fatieieva I.V. (ed.), 2021. Integrity: doctrine and case law [Dobrosovisnisʹ: doktryna i sudova praktyka]. Kharkiv: EKUS.
Copyright (c) 2021 Yu. I. Chalyi
![Creative Commons License](http://i.creativecommons.org/l/by/4.0/88x31.png)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.