| Abstract [eng] |
Management as Part of the Rights in Rem After Lithuania regained its independence, its property law has undergone tremendous changes. There appeared new rules that did not exist before. One such institute is the possession, which was enshrined in the Code of Civil Law as an independent right in rem, linking it to the acquisitive prescription rule. The legislator's decision to establish the possession as an independent right in rem created a discussion among Lithuanian law scientists, which is still present to this date. In order to acquire beneficial ownership to an object by acquisitive prescription, the possession must comply with the conditions laid down in the Code of Civil Law, content of which has been clarified by the courts in its practice. According to the doctrine, such abundance of conditions complicates the application of acquisitive prescription institute and, therefore, should be simplified. Possession is an integral part of other rights in rem. The most vast right in rem is (in fact) the property. In current times of ever changing economic relations as well as our understanding of the property, the question arises whether we can still say that the content of the beneficial ownership is also made up of the possession. Another important aspect relates to the transfer of possession within other rights in rem. For example, inadequate interpretation of property law relations would result in a person to whom such transfer rightfully belongs not receiving the transfer. That, in turn, would prevent them from exercising their rights and satisfy their interests. This paper analyses the content of possession as a concept by itself, and also as part of the property law. Furthermore, the latter is discussed by analysing the possession in two different contexts: as an independent right in rem and as an integral part of other rights in rem. |
