从履行时效占有条件看不动产财税登记法律解释引发的争议

M. Russo
{"title":"从履行时效占有条件看不动产财税登记法律解释引发的争议","authors":"M. Russo","doi":"10.18662/upalaw/38","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":": The emptying content of the intentional element of the possession trough the formalistic approach of the role of tax registration / declaration of the asset and its configuration at the specialized authorities of the local public administration is equivalent to an obstruction of the right to acquire the property as a result of fulfilling the term of acquisition limitation.The existence of such jurisprudential visions has a obviously illegal character, the position expressed in this regard is in contradiction both with the stipulations of the Civil Code of 1864 and the New Civil Code regarding adverse possession, and the enforcement, without legal basis, of the existence of the fiscal role or the declarative entry to the fiscal authorities, represents an addition to the law, in a manner that the court substitutes the legislator in completing the predetermined conditions in the matter.. To look formally at the institution of adverse possession and to cross the intentional subjective element of possession in the bureaucratic realm is a violation of the property rights, beyond the obvious opposition of the CEDO practice, which is crystallized in the contemporary direction of recognizing the particular importance of acquiring the right of the adverse possession, especially in those states where the cadastral records are absent or deficient. The fiscal registration of an asset cannot be appreciated as a component of the public character and under the name of owner which must be recognized for the possession exercised by the private person. Instead, it must be positioned only as a possibility of the owner to ensure the opposability of the possession in relation to third parties, especially in the absence of a normative regulation that would allow such registration. How to cite: Russo, M. (2019). Discoussions Regarding the Controversy Generated by the Legal Interpretation of the Fiscal Registration of the Immovable Assets from the Perspective of Fulfilling the Conditions of Adverse Possession.","PeriodicalId":30571,"journal":{"name":"Polis Revista de Stiinte Politice","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-03-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Discoussions Regarding the Controversy Generated by the Legal Interpretation of the Fiscal Registration of the Immovable Assets from the Perspective of Fulfilling the Conditions of Adverse Possession\",\"authors\":\"M. Russo\",\"doi\":\"10.18662/upalaw/38\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\": The emptying content of the intentional element of the possession trough the formalistic approach of the role of tax registration / declaration of the asset and its configuration at the specialized authorities of the local public administration is equivalent to an obstruction of the right to acquire the property as a result of fulfilling the term of acquisition limitation.The existence of such jurisprudential visions has a obviously illegal character, the position expressed in this regard is in contradiction both with the stipulations of the Civil Code of 1864 and the New Civil Code regarding adverse possession, and the enforcement, without legal basis, of the existence of the fiscal role or the declarative entry to the fiscal authorities, represents an addition to the law, in a manner that the court substitutes the legislator in completing the predetermined conditions in the matter.. To look formally at the institution of adverse possession and to cross the intentional subjective element of possession in the bureaucratic realm is a violation of the property rights, beyond the obvious opposition of the CEDO practice, which is crystallized in the contemporary direction of recognizing the particular importance of acquiring the right of the adverse possession, especially in those states where the cadastral records are absent or deficient. The fiscal registration of an asset cannot be appreciated as a component of the public character and under the name of owner which must be recognized for the possession exercised by the private person. Instead, it must be positioned only as a possibility of the owner to ensure the opposability of the possession in relation to third parties, especially in the absence of a normative regulation that would allow such registration. How to cite: Russo, M. (2019). Discoussions Regarding the Controversy Generated by the Legal Interpretation of the Fiscal Registration of the Immovable Assets from the Perspective of Fulfilling the Conditions of Adverse Possession.\",\"PeriodicalId\":30571,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Polis Revista de Stiinte Politice\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-03-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Polis Revista de Stiinte Politice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.18662/upalaw/38\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Polis Revista de Stiinte Politice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18662/upalaw/38","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

:通过资产的税务登记/申报作用及其在地方公共行政专门机构的配置的形式主义方法,将占有的故意要素的内容空化,相当于由于履行了取得限制期限而阻碍了财产的取得权。这种法理设想的存在具有明显的非法性质,在这方面表达的立场与1864年民法典和新民法典关于逆权占有的规定相矛盾,并且在没有法律依据的情况下强制执行财政角色的存在或向财政当局申报,是对法律的补充。以一种法院代替立法者完成该事项的预定条件的方式……从形式上看逆权占有制度,并在官僚领域中跨越故意主观占有因素,是对财产权的侵犯,超越了CEDO实践的明显反对,这在当代的方向上是明确的,即认识到获得逆权占有的权利的特别重要性,特别是在那些地籍记录缺失或有缺陷的州。一项资产的财务登记不能被认为是公共性质的组成部分,也不能以所有者的名义进行,必须承认所有者是由私人行使的财产。相反,必须将其定位为所有者确保其占有相对于第三方具有对应性的一种可能性,特别是在没有允许这种登记的规范性条例的情况下。引用方式:Russo, M.(2019)。从履行时效占有条件看不动产财税登记法律解释引发的争议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Discoussions Regarding the Controversy Generated by the Legal Interpretation of the Fiscal Registration of the Immovable Assets from the Perspective of Fulfilling the Conditions of Adverse Possession
: The emptying content of the intentional element of the possession trough the formalistic approach of the role of tax registration / declaration of the asset and its configuration at the specialized authorities of the local public administration is equivalent to an obstruction of the right to acquire the property as a result of fulfilling the term of acquisition limitation.The existence of such jurisprudential visions has a obviously illegal character, the position expressed in this regard is in contradiction both with the stipulations of the Civil Code of 1864 and the New Civil Code regarding adverse possession, and the enforcement, without legal basis, of the existence of the fiscal role or the declarative entry to the fiscal authorities, represents an addition to the law, in a manner that the court substitutes the legislator in completing the predetermined conditions in the matter.. To look formally at the institution of adverse possession and to cross the intentional subjective element of possession in the bureaucratic realm is a violation of the property rights, beyond the obvious opposition of the CEDO practice, which is crystallized in the contemporary direction of recognizing the particular importance of acquiring the right of the adverse possession, especially in those states where the cadastral records are absent or deficient. The fiscal registration of an asset cannot be appreciated as a component of the public character and under the name of owner which must be recognized for the possession exercised by the private person. Instead, it must be positioned only as a possibility of the owner to ensure the opposability of the possession in relation to third parties, especially in the absence of a normative regulation that would allow such registration. How to cite: Russo, M. (2019). Discoussions Regarding the Controversy Generated by the Legal Interpretation of the Fiscal Registration of the Immovable Assets from the Perspective of Fulfilling the Conditions of Adverse Possession.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
24 weeks
期刊最新文献
The County and the Realm. Significations and Developments in the History of Romanian Administration Possibilities for Survival and Economic Recovery through Fiscal Relaxation in the Pandemic and Post-pandemic Period Highlighting Price Reductions in Customer Accounting Non-patrimonial Rights Defense – The Right to One's Own Image Main References in Financing the Construction of Dwellings in the Interwar Period in Romania
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1