Perm University Herald. Juridical Sciences. 2016. Issue 2 (32) |
||||||||||
Title: | LIMITS AND LIMITATIONS OF THE TITLE TO LAND: ANALYSIS OF APPROACHES | |||||||||
Authors: | Niyazova A.N. Kyrgyz Russian Slavic University |
![]() |
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. | |||||||
ORCID: | 0000-0003-0926-6174 | ResearcherID: | G-3102-2016 | |||||||
«Scopus» & «Web of Science» article: | --- | |||||||||
Requisites: | Niyazova A. N. Predely i ogranicheniya prava sobstvennosti na zemlyu: analiz podkhodov [Limits and Limitations of the Title to Land: Analysis of Approaches]. Vestnik Permskogo Universiteta. Juridicheskie Nauki – Perm University Herald. Juridical Sciences. 2016. Issue 32. Pp. 208–215. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.17072/1995-4190-2016-32-208-215 | |||||||||
DOI: | 10.17072/1995-4190-2016-32-208-215 | |||||||||
Annotation: | Introduction: the article reviews and analyzes the existing legal theory and civil law approaches and positions on the content and relationships of the concepts of “restriction”, “limit”, “encumbrance”. These legal categories have different functional importance, which is evident from both analysis of their content and implementation of the subjective property right. Therefore, understanding the categories under consideration is of particular importance. Purpose: to form the idea of the existing different views on the content of the categories of “restriction”, “limit”, “encumbrance” and to present our own position on the issue. Methods: methodological framework of the research is based on a set of methods of scientific cognition, among which the dialectical method is the leading one; also, empirical methods of descriptions, comparison, as well as methods of analogy, abstraction, and the structural-functional method have been used. Results: limits and restrictions are inherent to the right of ownership. According to the author, limits of the right of ownership appear to be general frameworks determined by law, and the authorized person cannot go beyond them in order not to harm interests of other persons. Restrictions are understood as exemptions from the content of the property right associated with the imposition of restrictions on the owner, those being as a rule formulated through mandatory rules. Conclusions: limits (regardless of whether they belong to public or private ones) appear to be an objectified and relatively more static category, while the nature and content of encumbrances and restrictions can vary in the course of changes and development of both public relations themselves and conditions, as well as prerequisites for the implementation of the property right. It is proposed that the legislator should establish the principles of limits and restrictions for both subjective property rights and the title to land. | |||||||||
Keywords: | property right; legal powers, limits; restrictions; encumbrances; subjective right; interests; legal incentives; owner; bans | |||||||||
![]() |
download the full-version article |
|||||||||
References: |
Akkuratov I. Yu., Korshunov N. M., Khorev A. A. K voprosu ob ogranicheniyakh i obremeneniyakh prava sobstvennosti [On the Issue of Limitations and Burdens of Ownership]. Gosudarstvo i pravo – State and Law. 2000. |
|||||||||
Financing: | --- |