The cooperative ownership right to premises is a limited right in rem. Although since 31 July 2007 it is not possible to establish new cooperative ownership rights to premises, the existence of those that have been effectively established is not limited by any time limit. Authorized persons can dispose of them freely. Due to the fact that the premises being the subject of cooperative ownership rights are not real estate from the formal and legal point of view, they cannot be the subject of agreements that are used to transfer the ownership of real estate. This means that the cooperative ownership right to the premises cannot be transferred, in particular, on the basis of an annuity agreement. The analysis carried out in this study indicates that there are no obstacles preventing a change in the law aimed at creating the possibility of disposing of cooperative ownership rights to premises on the basis of an annuity contract. Such a change will remove the systemic inconsistency resulting from the fact that the cooperative ownership right to premises may be subject to transfer on the basis of a reverse mortgage loan agreement, and cannot be subject to transfer on the basis of an annuity agreement with a similar function. Creating the possibility of disposing of cooperative ownership rights to premises on the basis of an annuity agreement should not be limited only to the introduction of a provision to the Civil Code enabling the appropriate application of the provisions on annuity to agreements the purpose and effect of which is the transfer of the cooperative ownership right to premises in exchange for a commitment by its buyer to provide the seller with life support. Achieving the above-mentioned objectives of this amendment to the Civil Code, and in particular the proper protection of the interests of persons disposing of cooperative ownership rights to premises in exchange for a lifetime maintenance obligation, also requires consideration of amendments to some other acts, such as the Act on Housing Cooperatives and the Act on Land and Mortgage Registers and Mortgage. The changes in the legal status proposed in this study may improve the ability of older people to obtain care under civil law contracts.
Using a real property and liability for interfering with using neighboring, residential real properties Exercising ownership of a real property, in particular its use, might result in interfering with the use of neighboring, residential real properties. The article concerns the legal means available in the case of the use of a real property is a source of interference in the use of a neighboring, residential real property. The article analyzes not only the range of legal means available in these cases but also the range of entities that can be addressees of the actions undertaken by the owner seeking legal protection.
The question if family relations can be deemed as a subject of a personal right effective erga omnes has been considered in Polish jurisprudence and judgments of different courts including the Supreme Court since 2010. In 2018 there was a breakthrough in this debate of great theoretical and practical significance. On March 27, 2018, the Supreme Court of Poland passed three resolutions in extended benches (7 judges) in which it was confirmed that family relations are recognized as a subject of a personal right and that their protection is effective erga omnes. The Supreme Court said also that pecuniary compensation for infringement of family relations which are subject to a personal right can be granted not only in case someone caused that a person – party to a family relation – is dead, but also that the person is seriously and permanently injured. The question of recognition family relation as a subject of a personal right and that their protection is effective erga omnes is very controversial in the jurisprudence of civil law. The controversies are discussed in this paper. The author of this paper does not consider the controversies as enough to question the general idea of recognition of family relations as a subject to a personal right (erga omnes). The author of this paper shares the general view of the Supreme Court (Civil Chamber) presented in the resolutions passed on March 27, 2018, provided to some minor critical remarks. However, it should be pointed out that on October 22, 2019, the Supreme Court (Extraordinary Control and Public Affairs Chamber) passed the resolution in an extended bench (7 judges) in which the admissibility of recognizing family relations as a subject to a personal right (erga omnes) has been questioned. It means that this question is to be resolved by the joint chambers of the Supreme Court.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.