Ownership in a subjective sense, it is the possibility of a certain person with respect to the item of three pupils enshrined in paragraph 1 of Art. 209 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation: possession, use and disposal of their property. This means that the owner has the right to make any actions that do not contradict the law and other legal acts and not violating the rights and protected interests of others, including to alienate their property to other persons, transfer them, remaining the owner, the rights of ownership, use and disposal of property, to give property to a deposit and burden it in other ways to dispose of them in a different way .

In paragraph 2 of Art. 209 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation establishes the limits of the property right: the owner has the right to make any actions that do not contradict the law and other legal acts belonging to him and do not violate the rights and laws of other persons protected by law.

Essence ownership it is provided by law the opportunity to carry out the actual domination of the face over the thing. The actual domination over the thing is achieved by transferring things by either another way to achieve its establishment. This element of the triad is fundamental.

In this regard, it should be noted that, depending on the subject, carrying out the ownership and will of the owner, one can distinguish:

• o. independent ownership those. then, which is carried out by the owner or owner of another real law, which gives possession, independently;
• o. legal possession it is carried out but the will of the owner (rent, storage, commissioning, transportation, trust management etc.) or in cases provided for by law for the owner (possession of hereditary property, sequestrel, possession of the property of the ward, missingly absent, etc.);
• o. illegal possession - not by the will of the owner and not for the owner, but it may be conscientious if it is obtained from a person who did not have the right to alienation, which the acquirer did not know and could not know with due diligence.

Thus, this right thing finds its legal expression Status belongings Things to a specific person.

The empower - this is provided with objective right to extract the beneficial properties of the thing. It does not matter in principle, use is carried out to meet personal needs or in order to extract profits. So a farmer growing on its land plot various wheat varieties extracts those beneficial properties from the site and purchased grain itself, which are called "harvest" from the region. Dachnik, resting on a land plot, carrying out trees and other perennial plantings on it, also receives benefits from his property in the form of physical, spiritual satisfaction, as well as grown in the end of vegetables and fruits.

Unlike the two other empower the owner, the content and volume of the right of use (especially real estate) is largely determined by non-civil law standards, but by the norms of other sectoral affiliation.

For example, the most important, basic real estate are land plots. The owner of the land plot, designed, for example, for individual housing construction, can implement the empower only in the manner prescribed by land and urban-planning legislation. It is these norms that the parameters and types of real estate are determined, which can be built on the land plot (floors, the area, indentation from the edge of the site, the number of auxiliary bodies - baths, sheds and their characteristics, etc.), as well as the reconstruction parameters of the real estate object; Procedure for development project documentation and obtaining a construction permission, etc.

The empowerment there is property external expression the right of ownership and the ability to independently determine the fate of things by committing legal action, mostly transactions. At the same time, the order does not always mean the transfer of ownership of the ownership.

For example, the owner can transfer its property into confidential control to another person (trust management). Such transfer of property does not entail the transition of ownership of the trust manager, which is obliged to manage property in the interests of the owner or the third person specified.

The empowerment can be directed to the alienation of the thing, i.e. Transfer of all the right to another person. For example, when selling a residential building of the seller (signing a contract, a transfer act, a receipt of money) indicate the direction of his will and the willing of the rights to the object of real estate.

Therefore, it should be distinguished:

• o Order, entailing the transfer of ownership of the thing - alienation;
• o Order, entailing the transfer of the right of ownership of the thing (luggage for storage);
• o Order, entailing the transfer of the right to use (for example, when renting a land plot to the tenant, only the right to use).

Along with the right ownership, the owner is endowed responsibility for its content - "Bremen" of carrying relevant expenses and risk. As established by Art. 210 Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the owner carries the burden of the content of the property belonging to him, unless otherwise provided by law or contract. This means his duty to support property in proper condition (repair, introduction into the soil of mineral fertilizers, etc.), paying utility payments, taxes, registration, etc.

A special kind of such "burden" is the risk of random death or accidental damage (protection, insurance, etc.). In some cases, the owner can be released from its carrying, for example, according to the provisions of Art. 344 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the pledger carries the risk of random death or random damage to the laid property, unless otherwise provided by the Pledge Treaty.

Civil Code of the Russian Federation produces division of ownership of types, highlighting:

• o part state form Property property Russian Federation and subjects of the Russian Federation;
• o part municipal form Property of property is not allocated;
• o Private form of ownership Turns to two types of property of citizens and property legal entities;
• o "Other forms of ownership" of the Constitution of the Russian Federation and the Civil Code of the Russian Federation are not specified.

State property is the property belonging to the right of ownership of the Russian Federation (federal property), and property owned by the subjects of the Russian Federation - republics, edges, regions, cities of federal significance, autonomous region, autonomous District (Property of the subject of the Russian Federation). The property in state ownership is enshrined state enterprises and possession institutions, use and disposal. According to Art. 214 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation in state ownership may be two types of property:

• o Property assigned to state-owned enterprises and institutions on the principle of economic management and operational management;
• o Other property, including property that makes up the treasury of the Russian Federation and the treasury of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, budget funds.

Municipal property the property belonging to the right of ownership of urban and rural settlements, as well as other municipalities (property of urban districts, municipal districts and intracity territories of the cities of the federal significance). In accordance with Art. 49. Federal Law from 06.10.2003 No. 131-FZ "On general principles Organizations local governments In the Russian Federation "Municipal property, funds of local budgets, as well as property rights of municipalities constitute the economic basis of local self-government. Therefore municipal property It is recognized and protected by the state along with other forms of ownership.

Local self-government authorities have the right to transfer municipal property in temporary or continuous use of individuals and legal entities, authorities state power Of the Russian Federation (state authorities of the subject of the Russian Federation) and local governments of other municipalities, alienate, perform other transactions in accordance with federal laws.

Private property - this property owned by citizens and legal entities (commercial and non-commercial organizationsexcept state and municipal enterprises, as well as institutions). Russian legislation It is established that in private property may be any property, except separate species Property that in accordance with the law cannot belong to citizens or legal entities.

Despite general rule Invalidness of limiting property ownership on the right of private property, certain federal laws have established some restrictions on the number and cost of property owned by citizens and legal entities. So, according to Part 2 of Art. 4 of the Federal Law of July 24, 2002 No. 101-FZ "On the Turnover of Agricultural Land" maximum size The total area of \u200b\u200bagricultural land, which are located on the territory of one municipal Area and can be owned by one citizen and (or) of one legal entity, it is established by the law of the constituent entity of the Russian Federation equal to at least 10% of the total area of \u200b\u200bagricultural land located on the specified territory at the time of the provision and (or) acquisitions of such land plots.

According to paragraph 1 of Art. 216 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation real rights along with the right of ownership, in particular, are:

• o the right of life inherited ownership of the land plot (Art. 265 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation);
• o The right of permanent (indefinite) use of the land plot (Art. 268 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation);
• o servitude (Art. 274, 277 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation);
• o The right of economic management (Art. 294 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation);
• o The right of operational property management (Art. 296 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation).

This list is open.

Civil Code, N 51-FZ | Art. 209 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation

Article 209 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. Content of ownership (current edition)

1. The owner belongs to the right of ownership, use and disposal by their property.

2. The owner is entitled to make any actions that do not contradict the law and other legal acts belonging to him and do not violate the rights and laws protected by law, including to alienate their property to other persons, to transfer them, remaining the owner , the rights of possession, use and disposal of property, to give property to a deposit and burden it in other ways, to dispose of them in a different way.

3. Ownership, use and disposal of land and other natural resources to the extent that their turnover is allowed by law (Article 129) is carried out by their owner freely, if it does not damage environment and does not violate the rights and legitimate interests Other persons.

4. The owner can transfer its property into confidential control to another person (trust manager). Property transfer to trust management does not entail the transition of ownership of the trust manager, which is obliged to manage property in the interests of the owner or the third person specified.

• BB code
• Text

Document URL [Copy]

Comment to Art. 209 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation

Judicial practice under Article 209 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation:

• Supreme Court's decision: Definition N 46-kg16-22, Civil Affairs Directory, Cassation

  Court appeals instance I left without changing the decision of the court of first instance and indicated that since the sale and sale agreement dated March 27, 2015 was not concluded with the owner of the car and contrary to his will, the court correctly on the basis of paragraphs 1, 2 of Article 209, paragraph 1 of Article 454 Civil Code Russian Federation is invalid specified contract Purchase ...

• Supreme Court decision: Definition N 84-UPG16-3, Civil Affairs Judicial Collegium, Appeal

  The contested provisions, according to the administrative plaintiff, contradict paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 209 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, since these provisions are limited to its rights as the owner of land plots; In these land plots, it is prohibited economic activity, construction for this infrastructure ...

• Supreme Court decision: Definition N 309-ES16-1899, Judicial Collegium for Economic Disputes, Cassation

  Under these circumstances and on the basis of the provisions of paragraph 1 of Article 8.1, paragraph 1 of Article 131, Articles 209, 244 of the Civil Code, Part 1 of Article 2 of the Law on Registration Conclusions of the Court of Appeal on belonging to the Company "Lose" share in the amount of ½ in the right of general dolly ownership The disputed premises are legal ...

+ More ...

1. The owner belongs to the right of ownership, use and disposal by their property.
2. The owner is entitled to make any actions that do not contradict , the rights of possession, use and disposal of property, to give property to a deposit and burden it in other ways, to dispose of them in a different way.
3. Ownership, use and disposal of land and other natural resources to the extent to which their turnover is allowed by law (Article 129) is carried out by their owner freely, if it does not damage the environment and does not violate the rights and legitimate interests of others.
4. The owner can transfer its property into confidential control to another person (trust manager). Property transfer to trust management does not entail the transition of ownership of the trust manager, which is obliged to manage property in the interests of the owner or the third person specified.

Comment on Article 209

1. Section of the Second Code is dedicated to the right of ownership and other relevant rights. The real rights are inherent in certain general features, which allow you to allocate them into a separate category of rights. The essence of real rights is the possibility of owner of such a right to influence the thing, to receive from it, besides any other individuals, at its own discretion and in their will. It can be said that the real right gives the face the power directly over the thing. In theory, it is sometimes constructed a rather complicated scheme that complements this power also the responsibility of an indefinite range of third parties to refrain from violation of real law. This is done with the goal to avoid the idea of related law As about actual attitude to things, which contradicts his social nature. However, this design seems unnecessary. First, any right cannot be disturbed by third parties. Consequently, this ban itself is not able to reflect the essence of one or another right and cannot act as a distinguishing feature of this or that category of rights. Secondly, power in relation to a thing that is the essence of the real law is not a connection with a thing, but a socially determined attitude: after all, the thing itself, and the way of the impact on it is not determined by non-physical (technological), but social, economic, legal parameters . In other words, the real law is not just power over the thing, but legal authorities.
2. The real law belonging to the subject (subjective real law) is characterized by a number of signs.
First of all, the real right is the right absolute. This means that this right opposes all other persons, is directed against all, excludes all other individuals from the thing. The private manifestation of the absoluteness of the real law is that the same right to the thing cannot belong to more than one person: all others are excluded from this right. In the case when the real right belongs to several persons (for example, the right common property), they act as one person and must produce a common will in relation to a thing.
Mandatory rights differ from absolute real rights. The obligatory right, consisting in the right of a certain person, is always relative to, applies only to this obligated person.
The relative nature of the obligatory right is predetermined by the method of its implementation - by applying the requirement for the debtor. The method of its transfer is different - in the order of the cessia (Art. 382). Cessia provides for the participation of the parties to the creditor and the debtor. For example, the right of the tenant, which is obligatory, despite the increased protection of the tenant in the form of a follow-up (see below), may be transmitted to another person only in the procedure of cessia, while the real rights are transmitted in a different way (art. 223).
Commitent law is not characterized by exception: the obligated person may have the same or similar duties and in relation to other persons, as a result of which such institutions arise as a competition of creditors. Since compulsory rights are associated with only two parties, the lender and the debtor, the parties have the right to determine their relationship at its discretion. For this reason, mandatory rights may differ infinitely in their content. The real rights acting against all for the same reasons cannot be different.
Real rights are established by law (Art. 216 GK, etc.). In relation to real rights, the principle of an exhaustive list is valid.
3. The real right is valid while there is an individually defined thing, which is the object of law; The obligatory right is valid while there is a debtor or his successor. As the destruction of things or loss of identity, it stops the real law and the death of the debtor in the absence of successors ceases the right obligatory (personal). A qualified way to terminate a personal obligation is a bankruptcy that has the same consequences as the death of the debtor, while bankruptcy does not affect the property rights to the debtor's property.
4. The subject of the real law cannot change the character (type) of law, but can only abandon the right to unilaterally.
The real law has such quality as the right to follow. This quality is one of the most important and most characteristic properties of real law. The essence of the right of the following is that, whoever had a thing, the right to it remains at the subject of law, until he expressed the will to alienate his right. Even if the thing moved to the next owner of the transaction, the real law continues to follow her.
However, in cases where the normal procedure for turnover is violated and the thing is acquired in the order of the initial, not derived acquisition (see the comment on Art. 218), and the items are on the item.
5. Ownership has such a property as elasticity. This means that as soon as any limitations of the right, established by the owner in favor of other persons who have received the right to the same thing, the right of ownership is immediately restored to full Without any additional legal acts.
At the same time, there is no reason to talk about the restoration of ownership due to the recognition of the transaction about the alienation of the thing is invalid: the fact is that the fiction that makes it consider that there is no transaction, it allows us to conclude that the right does not disappear. However, since we are talking About things, the effect of this fiction is limited to the state of the thing itself. By the time the transaction is invalid, the thing may be lost, destroyed, recycled. This is visible from Art. 167 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, providing for the impossibility of returning things. Consequently, the recognition of the transaction invalid itself does not mean restoring the right to the thing.
From the situation of the restoration of right, the case of returning the owned by the ownership of the ownership of the ownership of the property should also be distinguished from the restoration of the right: in this case, the right itself was not limited in favor of certain individuals, but lost the possibility of actual implementation.
6. The right of ownership is indefinite. As the famous English lawyer said, "a ray of property cuts through the thickness of time." The restriction of the right of ownership of the term would mean the restriction of the owner's rights, the transformation of ownership of incomplete, limited. However, this would conflict with the essence of ownership.
At the same time, mandatory rights to the thing, although they allow you to use a thing anyway, are always not only personal, i.e. Depending on the will of the debtor, but also urgent, i.e. Always limited for a long time. Outside this period, the use of the thing loses the sanction of the owner and becomes illegal.
7. Such a property as absolute is not only inherent in real rights. Absolute are the rights of the author, right to name, life and health, other intangible benefits. The difference between these rights from it is made by the object.
The object of real rights is an individually defined thing. This property of things, like others - divisibility, consumption, etc., is determined not so much by the physical qualities of things as the revolutions are clear, i.e. Economic and legal.
The same thing may have and not possess signs individually defined, depending on the specific legal situation. For example, 100 tons of oil are not an individually defined thing and cannot be the object of real law. But if 100 tons of oil are placed in a well-known repository, then the real right to them may already arise.
As an example of an individually defined thing, works of art (paintings, sculptures, etc.) are usually given. However, in this case legal qualifications Things depends on the specific situation. For example, if a designer pledged to accommodate 10 paintings in the abstract manner in it, we are talking about generic things, even if the author or authors chosen by the parties are specified (except when the specified author has no more than 10 paintings ).
The nature of the object of law follows from the essence of the right and from the method of its protection, which is also predetermined by the nature of the right. It is clear that the subject of real law cannot extend its power to a thing that is not defined individually, i.e. Not reflected anyway from other things of the same kind. He can not remove other people from the thing, if it is not clear what this thing is. And if the thing is lost, its persecution of real-state means of protection (see a comment on Art. Art. 301 - 305) is impossible, as it is impossible to determine where it is in which it consists of whether it has it at all.
8. B. judicial practice The question of the object of real law is becoming particularly important when a way to protect the right is discussed. For example, it was repeatedly stressed that the statement of the claims on a certain amount expressed in square meters of square, tons, etc., cannot be qualified as a real requirement, since it is impossible to determine the individually defined thing to which the plaintiff claims.
Most often, such collisions arose on the basis of disputes on the execution of contracts for shared participation in construction. If a construction participant, referring to the right of the right to share a total of ownership, makes a requirement to allocate its area in the house under construction, indicating its requirements in the amount of this area, i.e. In square meters, this requirement cannot be satisfied, since there is no object of real law. Such an object can only be a structure or part of it. Therefore, the stated real requirements in the natural indicators are rejected by the courts.
Participation agreements, if they have the nature of the contracts of a simple partnership (joint activities), lead to the emergence of common property. In this case, the report of the participant on the recognition of rights may be expressed only as a claim with a fraction in the form of a fraction in a particular structure. Individualization of the object of law is achieved here by specifying on a specific structure. But in this case, an invalid statement of the requirement expressed in the form of the size of the area or the amount of investment is unacceptable. Even if the overall area of \u200b\u200bthe whole structure is known, the plaintiff must designate its right by specifying the share calculated as a fraction. The court is not entitled to carry out such calculations and in such a way to change the claimed requirement.
9. A specific specificity has such an object of law as securities in uncertified form. If the securities (but, of course, the rights not enshrined in them) in the documentary form are the object of real rights, relative to the securities in the uncertified form it is impossible to say. In essence, they are obligatory rights. At the same time, the turnover of these rights is given to some properties of the turnover of things, in particular, the acquisitions of securities even in case of invalidity of transactions by the courts, protection is provided to both in good faith acquirers (Article 302 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation). Holders of rights to uncertified securities are referred to as the owners, although possession as physical power is not carried out over things. On the contrary, the category of ownership of the thing is opposed to the right to the thing according to the sign that in the first case we are talking about actual domination over the thing, and in the second - about legal. The owner of a security characterized by the right to paper, i.e. legal authority, does not meet the overall concept of the owner. Therefore, it should be concluded that in relation to non-documentary securities, the term "ownership" acquires a specific value that excludes the automatic application of the NORM standards for ownership (Art. Article 305, 234 of the Civil Code, etc.). The same can be said about the nominal non-documentary securities holder. In contrast to the famous classical right, the concept of holding is the inappropriate ownership of a thing for another person - only a property of action in someone else's interest remains here. At the same time, the specificity of the turnover of securities affects the exclusion of the figure of the owner of the right to dispose of the papers until the nominal hold is terminated.
For example, the society filed a lawsuit to the registrar, demanding from it to record a gear disposal for the transfer of uncertified shares performed by the owner, although the nominal holder, on whose personal account was shares, did not give such an order. The court satisfied the lawsuit. The higher court decision canceled, indicating that in addition to the nominal holder, other persons who do not have these shares on their personal account, including the owner of the shares, are not entitled to make a gear disposal about the transfer of shares.
Obviously, the regime of the right to uncertificate securities does not allow these right to the number of things. In addition, non-documentary securities themselves can be deleasing in circulation and lose all signs of the object of real law. The main way of individualization of a thing with only generic signs - and to such things and are uncertified securities that have a denomination, data on the issuer and emission assigned to a certain set in principle of identical papers at once, is a separate by possession (separate storage, labets , packaging, etc.). With regard to securities, these methods are not applicable, apart from only crediting on the personal account of the owner. But as soon as the papers come in turnover, they are deletently and with some minimum number of operations related to the transition through several facial accounts, they lose their identity. From this point on, applying the norms of the II Civil Code of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, even by analogy, becomes impossible.
10. The question of the right to money remains difficult. Money is indicated in Art. 128 of the Civil Code among things. Money are things, because it is about paper, metal money (coin). With regard to these things, if they are individualized (for example, placed in a safe), the right of ownership arises with the inherent properties. In particular, the death of money entails the loss of ownership of them. At the same time, the law is limited by the opportunities for the recovery of money from someone else's illegal possession.
However, in the modern economy, the development of relations about the money led to the emergence of so-called non-cash money. Although cashless money is obviously displaced in the circulation of cash money, their legal nature remains controversial. In any case, the right to receive money on the current account in a credit institution, other similar rights to funds, are subject to the regime of the rights obligatory in that the implementation of these rights depends on the debtor (credit institution), including from its creditworthiness . At the same time, cash, cashless money can not die physically, like things.
Although the money, as well as cash, can not be the subject of the collateral (see: The Vestnik of the Russian Federation. 1996. N 10. P. 69), the right to funds belonging to the person under a bank deposit agreement, according to many lawyers, may Be the subject of cessia, similar to other obligatory rights. The subject of the cessia may also be the right to require a credential institution on the issuance of a balance account after termination of the bank account agreement. These facts also suggest that the funds in the credit institution (cashless money) are not things and do not belong to their owner on the real law.
11. Since the establishment of the registration system of the right of ownership and real rights to real estate facilities acquired the fundamental importance to the division of things on movable and immovable (see Art. Art. 130, 131).
12. Special value Property rights, its central position among property rights is predetermined by the fact that property is the main condition for the implementation of human economic and creative abilities. Without receiving free, secured by all law enforcement of access to things, a person is deprived of the opportunity to ensure its existence, satisfy its needs. The most free, not constrained by someone else's will respond to the greatest extent to the disclosure of human abilities. This is the relationship is given to the right of ownership.
The ownership is the most free right of the person on the thing, the most complete real right.
13. The law, following the tradition, established in the domestic right since the XIX century, indicates that the owner owns the rights of ownership, use and orders of property.
It is understood that the ownership is the exercise of physical power over things, such as living in a residential building, the protection of another real estate object, storing movable things in stock, etc. Using is the extraction of beneficial properties from a thing, such as reading books from a personal library, riding your car. The owner itself determines what the benefits of one or another of his thing, and any of his treatment with a thing, since it does not contradict the law, is considered as use. The disposal is primarily the commission with a thing of various transactions that change legal attitude To the things of the owner and giving the right to the thing to other persons, including the alienation of the thing, i.e. Transfer of property rights to another person. The order is the destruction of things, as well as other actions that entail the loss of identity things - consumption (for example, fuel), recycling. As a result of transactions and other managerial acts of the owner, the legal fate of the thing is changing.
14. An indication of the law on ownership, use, the order of the affected by the owner cannot be understood in the sense of the exhaustion of all the right of ownership, as in the sense of the instructions for the splitting of ownership of three or other numbers. The ownership is united, solid law and is not disintegrated by some finite number of emphasis. The law speaks exactly the right of ownership, and not about the individual equity of the owner.
This circumstance should be borne in mind when qualifying transactions about the thing. Transferring a thing to other persons on a particular right (rental, trust management, commission, etc.), the owner does not transmit them to their property right - neither completely or in part. Therefore, at least a tenant and owned and enjoyed the thing received under the contract, it cannot mean that he received from the owner of the authority of possession and use. The Rentative Rights consist in certain rights Requirements for the owner (Article 307), and at the same time preserves the fullness of its right; It is the presence of ownership of him and ensures the interest of the tenant in the fact that the owner adopt certain property obligations to him. After all, only the obligations of the person who retains the full right to property, ensure the property interests who intend to use this property anyway.
The erroneous impression that when concluding contracts about the thing, the owner allegedly transfers its right-wing and thereby loses them, can lead to more serious practical errors. In particular, it is often possible to face such a logic that when transferring things to the commission, the owner loses the right to dispose of it either that during the arrest of things with its simultaneous withdrawal the right of ownership disappears at all, since the owner is devoid of opportunities and possessions, and orders.
In fact, in such cases, the ownership is still owned by the owner, and its capabilities with respect to his property are determined by the contract - in this case, these are personal obligations to the owner of things - or the law, which continues to consider it precisely as the owner, including In terms of providing him with claims to protect property against violators.
15. The erroneous idea that the ownership is reduced to the one mentioned by the three crime of the owner leads to an incorrect conclusion about the existence of a real ownership right of ownership. In fact, this right is unknown. And it's not just that it is not specified in Art. 216.
As already mentioned, the owner owns the whole full of right to the thing. The allocation in this right of any individual pity does not make any sense, since the implementation and the protection of the right is to be addicted only from the will of the owner, which can be limited only by law. Thus, the preliminary allocation of a law in the composition of ownership is not only devoid of practical meaning, but also one way or another will lead to its limitation, which comes into a contradiction with the unlimitedness of this right.
As for the ownership of a thing carried out by other persons related to the owners of an agreement on the thing, then such possession is carried out by virtue of a personal obligation taken by the owner. Obviously, such a right thing is not a thing.
Finally, the possession carried out in the framework of limited real law (see a comment on Art. Art. 216, 305), it does not exist in itself, but is the content of the relevant real law and, therefore, cannot be considered separate subjective civil law.
Illegal possession, i.e. Ownership without reason, which is not carried out by the will of the owner, is not subjective and in the case when it is protected (see a comment on Art. 234).
Similarly, there are no real use and orders.
16. In paragraph 4 of Art. 209 Specially emphasizes that the transfer of property into trust management does not entail the termination of the transition of property rights, although the trust manager can own, use and dispose of the thing. Thus, it is emphasized again, as in paragraph 2 of Art. 209, which arising from another person by force of the contract for the transfer of the right of law is not identical to the right of ownership as a whole, nor in parts, since such parts can be allocated. When passing things under the Treaty, the owner continues to maintain all the completeness of his right until the thing is alienated. Incomplete, splitting ownership of GK does not recognize. Thus, normally, paragraph 4 of Art. 209 GK emphasizes the incompatibility of the design of the split property, including those emerging on the basis of the Anglo-American trust, with Russian private law.
17. The right of ownership is the most complete real right. Ownership is carried out at the discretion of the owner. However, as any law, the right of ownership may be limited by law (paragraph 2 of Art. 1 of the Civil Code).
When implementing the right of ownership, the owner must act so as not to enter into a contradiction with law and other legal acts And not violate the rights and protected interests of others. We are talking about the observance of various special rules - fire-fighting, sanitary, etc. At the same time, the burden of proving violations of the rights and legitimate interests of other persons is imposed on the victims. The owner is not obliged to prove the legality of his actions to implement the right of ownership.
18. In the practice of the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, the issue of the right of state to limit ownership is repeatedly raised. These issues arose in cases of the withdrawal of land plots for public needs, in relation to the tax and customs duties of the owner. The general conclusion can be considered that the state has the right to limit the right of ownership on the basis of public interests. However, the balance of private and public interests should be observed.
How difficult is to find such a balance, allows you to judge, in particular, the case of James against the UK. The plaintiffs challenged the law in which tenants who received the right to rent and buildings in the central part of London in the XIX century, after the lease term, received the right to force their real estate at the nominal value. The sharpness of the dispute was given the fact that some tenants, buying real estate, sold it to third parties at a price, many times exceeding the amount of redemption. European Court According to human rights, admitted that, although there is a state intervention in ownership, it can be justified by a significant public interest. At the same time, the practice of the Italian authorities granted by government maternity delay to evict tenants from rented residential premises, was recognized as a European court of unjustified, violating the balance of public and private interests and infringerating the rights of owners-landlords.
Considering the MELLACHER case and others against Austria, the European Court concluded that the limitation of the limiting legislative act rental is not a violation of ownership, protected by the Convention; Such a restriction, since it pursues the goal of social protection, does not violate the balance of private and public interests.
In the case of Pine Valley Developments Ltd and others against Ireland, the European Court of Human Rights decided that the prohibition of the land-owned land plot otherwise, except for landscaping purposes, is not unacceptable interference in the ownership of the person.
19. The restriction of ownership can not be a contract of owner with another person. Such an agreement does not affect the right of ownership and does not limit it. The interest of the person who is transferred to the property is provided not to the restriction of property rights, but adopted by the owner of obligations, in particular, the obligation to provide a thing in proper condition, to respond to its health, etc. Thus, it is the completeness of the ownership of the obligated person (debtor) is the means of ensuring the interests of the owner (creditor).
20. The practice of the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg plays a significant role in p. 18 comments, a significant role in the formation of the rules governing the right of ownership, the practice of the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg is plays. 1 Protocol N 1 to the Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as well as the practice of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation for the application of the norm of Art. 35 Constitution of the Russian Federation.
With all the undoubted importance of this practice, it should be noted that for a number of reasons, the facilitated judicial bodies are expandingly interpreted by the very concept of ownership. You can see that how Constitutional Court The Russian Federation and the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg are considering disputes and other rights - mandatory, housing, rights to the results of creative activities, as well as the rights of labor, tax, customs, etc., based on the norms about protecting property rights.
Thus, in the orbit of the relevant standards, originally concerned only with the rights of the property, property and even some non-property relations were involved.
Understanding the reasons for such practice, it should be borne in mind that the decisions of these judicial bodies should not have the revision of the very concept of things and real law. It should be borne in mind that neither the Constitution of the Russian Federation nor the Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms does not seem to do not contain any detailed regulation of property relations in the form of them are provided for by civil codecs and how they exist In real civil circulation. In this regard, if certain property conflicts affect the significant rights of individuals and legal entities, even if these rights are not the rights of ownership, the only way to recognize their jurisdiction becomes an expansion understanding of the relevant norms, in particular Art. 35 Constitution of the Russian Federation. Thus, it becomes possible to disseminate the jurisdiction of the Constitutional Court to the relationship, which themselves are not ownership, and in some cases are not even both private relations.
This practice of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, having an undoubtedly positive result and providing a noticeable impact on a variety of lives, still can not be interpreted in the sense that the difference between the relationship between the relationship and the obligatory, between property relations and other private-protecting relations, between private law and right public.

And other legal acts and not violating the rights and protected interests of others, including alienating their property to other persons (sell, change, give, etc.), transfer them, remaining the owner, the rights of ownership, use and orders by property, give property to a deposit and burden it in other ways to dispose of it in a different way.

The order is determined by the legal fate of the property, that is, either stops, or the ownership of it is suspended. The disposal of property owned by incapacitated persons is carried out on their behalf legitimate representatives with the restrictions provided for by law.

see also

• Right of use
• Claim for the recognition of real law

Literature

Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.

Watch what is "Order of Property" in other dictionaries:

In accordance with Art. 35 GK Inters of the ward, including those due to him from managing his property, with the exception of income that the ward is entitled to dispose of themselves, spend the guardian or trustee exclusively in ... ...

Order of the property of the ward - Caring and the use of guardians and trustees, as well as guardianship and guardianship by the property of the ward. Revenues of the ward citizen, including income due to the ward from the management of its property, with the exception of income, ... ...

Disposal of property in communal property - is carried out in accordance with the Decree of the President of the Republic of Belarus of November 16, 2006 N 677 on some issues of disposal of property in municipal property (Next Decree). In accordance with P / P 1.1 p. Declaration of alienation ... ... Legal vocabulary modern civil law

Order, orders, cf. 1. Only units. Action on ch. manage order. Disposal of property. Pass the question at the disposal of the director. 2. Resolution, order. Government order. Return. Receive … Explanatory Dictionary Ushakov

Order: Order in administrative law The type of management of the department published, as a rule, is solely the head of the collegial body, in order to resolve operational issues; Most often, has a limited validity period and ... ... Wikipedia

Order - 1. Act of management, which has a domineering, published under the assigned official person, the authority of competence, which is binding for citizens and organizations to be addressed; 2. One of the empathy owner things, ... ... Large accounting dictionary

Order - 1. Act of management, which has an imperative nature, published within the framework of an appropriate person, the competence authority, which has a binding force for citizens and organizations, which is addressed to 2. One of the empower the owner of the thing, ... ... Great Economic Dictionary

Order of municipal property - actions of local governments for the definition of legal fate municipal property, including the transfer to its other persons in the property, on another real right, for rent, free use, Trust management, pledge ... Official terminology

1) One of the empower the owner of the thing that allows it to make such transactions as a purchase for sale, supply, donation, rent, etc. As a result of acts, R. property is carried out by its alienation, as well as transfer to temporary possession and ... ... Legal vocabulary

Order - (eng. Disposal, Order, Instructions) 1) in civil law One of the most important right of the right of ownership. RF Right belongs to the owner of things, as well as persons with limited ... Encyclopedia Rights

Article 209. Content of property rights

1. The owner belongs to the right of ownership, use and disposal by their property.

2. The owner is entitled to make any actions that do not contradict , the rights of possession, use and disposal of property, to give property to a deposit and burden it in other ways, to dispose of them in a different way.

3. Ownership, use and disposal of land and other natural resources to the extent to which their turnover is allowed by law (), they are carried out by the owner freely, if it does not damage the environment and does not violate the rights and legitimate interests of others.

4. The owner can transfer its property into confidential control to another person (trust manager). Property transfer to trust management does not entail the transition of ownership of the trust manager, which is obliged to manage property in the interests of the owner or the third person specified.

Article 210. The burden of property content

The owner carries the burden of property belonging to him, unless otherwise provided by law or contract.

Article 211. Risk of accidental death

The risk of random death or random damage to the property bears its owner, unless otherwise provided by law or contract.

Article 212. Standles of ownership

1. In the Russian Federation, private, state, municipal and other forms of ownership are recognized in the Russian Federation.

2. The property may be owned by citizens and legal entities, as well as the Russian Federation, constituent entities of the Russian Federation, municipalities.

3. Features of the acquisition and termination of property rights to property, possession, use and orders them, depending on whether the property is owned by a citizen or a legal entity, in the property of the Russian Federation, the subject of the Russian Federation or the municipality, can be established only by law.

The law defines the types of property that can be only in state or municipal property.

4. The rights of all owners are protected equally.

Article 213. The ownership of citizens and legal entities

1. The property of citizens and legal entities can be any property, with the exception of certain types of property, which in accordance with the law cannot belong to citizens or legal entities.

2. The number and cost of property owned by citizens and legal entities is not limited to, except in cases where such restrictions are established by law in order provided for in paragraph 2 of Article 1 of this Code.

3. Commercial and non-commercial organizations, except for state and municipal enterprises, as well as institutions, are owners of property transferred to them as deposits (contributions) by their founders (participants, members), as well as property acquired by these legal entities for other reasons. (as amended by Federal Law of 03.11.2006 N 175-FZ)

4. Public and religious organizations (associations), charitable and other funds are owners of property acquired and can use it only to achieve the objectives provided for by their constituent documents. Founders (participants, members) of these organizations lose the right to property transferred to the ownership of the relevant organization. In the event of the elimination of such an organization, its property remaining after the satisfaction of creditors' claims is used for the purposes referred to in its constituent documents.

Article 214. State Property Law

1. The state property in the Russian Federation is the property owned by the right of ownership of the Russian Federation (Federal property), and the property belonging to the right of ownership to the subjects of the Russian Federation - the republics, edges, regions, cities of the federal significance, the autonomous region, autonomous districts (the ownership of the subject Russian Federation).

2. Earth and others natural resourceswho are not owned by citizens, legal entities or municipalities, are state ownership.

3. On behalf of the Russian Federation and the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, the rights of the owner are carried out by the authorities and persons specified in Article 125 of this Code.

4. The property in state ownership is consolidated by state-owned enterprises and institutions in possession, use and disposal in accordance with this Code (Articles 294,).

The funds of the relevant budget and other state property, not enshrined at state-owned enterprises and institutions, constitute the state treasury of the Russian Federation, the treasury of the republic as part of the Russian Federation, the treasury of the region, the region, the city of federal significance, the autonomous region, the autonomous district.

5. Treaty state property The federal property and to the property of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation is carried out in the manner prescribed by law.

Article 215. The right of municipal property

1. The property belonging to the right of ownership of urban and rural settlements, as well as other municipalities, is a municipal property.

2. On behalf municipal Education The rights of the owner are carried out by local governments and the person specified in Article 125 of this Code.

3. The property located in municipal property is consolidated by municipal enterprises and institutions in possession, use and disposal in accordance with this Code (Articles 294, 296).

Funds local budget and other municipal property, not enshrined behind municipal enterprises and institutions, make up the municipal tremury of the relevant urban, rural settlement or other municipality. Standard 305 of this Code.

Article 217. Privatization of state and municipal property

The property in state or municipal property may be transferred by its owner to the property of citizens and legal entities in the manner prescribed by the laws on the privatization of state and municipal property.

Under the privatization of state and municipal property, the provisions provided for by this Code that regulate the procedure for acquiring and terminating the right of ownership are applied if the laws on privatization are not provided otherwise.