Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
  • 1
    Online Resource
    Online Resource
    Russian State University of Justice ; 2023
    In:  Rossijskoe pravosudie , No. 7 ( 2023-06-25), p. 38-45
    In: Rossijskoe pravosudie, Russian State University of Justice, , No. 7 ( 2023-06-25), p. 38-45
    Abstract: One of the most complex civil law relations are the relations of common shared ownership, which is due to the presence of such an object as a share in them. The integrity of the relations of common shared ownership should be ensured by a common understanding of the share in the law and judicial practice, without which a harmonious combination of legal and individual regulation of these relations is impossible. The purpose of the study is to find out whether the share is equally understood in law and judicial practice, and whether there is a need to develop a unified concept of the share from the standpoint of individual and legal regulation of legal relations of common ownership. To achieve this goal, a number of tasks have been solved: the current civil legislation in the part containing the definition of the share has been analyzed; judicial practice has been summarized in the same part and the scientific literature has been reviewed. Accordingly, methods of analysis, synthesis, generalization, induction, and comparison were used. In conclusion, it is concluded that the law and judicial practice understand the share in the right of common ownership differently. The law establishes that the share is part of the right, but at the same time indicates the share as an ideal part of the thing. Judicial practice adds that a share can be a thing (a real part of a thing) or a part of the value. This state of affairs testifies to the discord between the legal and individual regulation of the studied relations, which is theoretically unacceptable and practically counterproductive. In this regard, the science of civil law has a task: to develop a unified concept of a share that would not relate to the concept of a “share in the right”, “a real or ideal part of a thing”, as well as a “share in value”, since they have not fulfilled their task of creating a coherent structure of shared ownership relations.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 2072-909X
    URL: Issue
    Language: Unknown
    Publisher: Russian State University of Justice
    Publication Date: 2023
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 2
    Online Resource
    Online Resource
    Russian State University of Justice ; 2021
    In:  Rossijskoe pravosudie , No. 9 ( 2021-08-23), p. 41-47
    In: Rossijskoe pravosudie, Russian State University of Justice, , No. 9 ( 2021-08-23), p. 41-47
    Abstract: Introduction. Сivil legislation has been supplemented with norms regulating relations regarding the adoption of decisions by civil law communities, which are the reason for the emergence of civil rights and obligations. Nevertheless, there is still uncertainty in science about whether decisions can be considered independent legal facts or whether they are a kind of transactions or consents. Theoretical Basis. Methods. The article is based on an analysis of the norms of positive law, primarily – Civil Code of Russian Federation. Using the comparative method, common and distinctive features of decision, transaction and consent institutions are identified. The method of classification and systematization is used to describe them. Results. As a result, the author comes to the conclusion about the different nature of the studied institutions. The will of the party to the transaction is aimed at generating legal consequences for themselves personally. These consequences occur as a result of the transaction. A member of the community, giving his vote, forms a decision that will have consequences not for him personally. In addition, the vote may end with a decision that the community member did not expect. The will of the party to the transaction is absolute. The party itself determines whether to enter into a relationship or not, what the terms of the transaction will be, and so on. At the same time, the will of the participant in determining the final type of decision is very limited. As a rule, voting is carried out on pre-defined questions, and the answer to them is limited to the answers «yes» or «no». Common to transactions and decisions is the possibility provided for by law of calling them invalid. However, both the grounds and consequences of invalidity differ. Unlike transactions, decisions are not subject to convalidation, but their flaws can be corrected by repeated adoption. Decisions also differ from consents. The consents is aimed only at transactions, whereas the decisions have a much greater field of action, including the transaction. Consent – are acts of attached will and the decisions – are act of the consolidated will. Discussion and Conclusion. The decision is a special and independent legal fact, which differs from transactions and consents in its subject composition, the nature of the expressed will and its direction, as well as the consequences of invalidity and the possibility of healing.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 2072-909X
    URL: Issue
    Language: Unknown
    Publisher: Russian State University of Justice
    Publication Date: 2021
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. Further information can be found on the KOBV privacy pages