Property law (RL) arose a very long time ago; its foundation occurred only during the beginning of the emergence of civilization. This type was constantly evolving, it never stood still and was constantly being improved. Its points changed along with the changing conditions that were taking place throughout the world. As a result, completely new relationships and subjects (EP) arose. As a result, all the processes that took place required enshrinement in legislation so that they could be regulated. As a result of all this (VP) exists to this day. The object of any (VP) is a certain property.
What are the objects and subjects of real rights - concept and content
This type is capable of covering all norms about human rights to certain things. On the basis of civil relations (VP) arise. Things are fixed in relation to the subjects of the relationship.
If we talk about a private economy, then one person has full rights to this property, while other people cannot dispose of the property. As a result, these rights are formalized legally, acquiring status (VP).
If we talk about general characteristics(VP), then in the history of all legislation it developed and took shape in different ways. IN Soviet times legally rooted (VP). And in 1922, one could even find in Civil Law such a clause as “Property Law”. Property rights of the development were also included in this clause. But when it was allowed to recognize ownership rights to residential space, this right of development was canceled.
The video shows objects and elements of real rights:
Earlier Natural resources were considered only the property of the state, and housing did not have the status of movable and immovable. These indicators had a negative impact on development (VP). But with short intervals of time (VP) they tried to restore it. But the legislative branch did not support this initiative.
Objects (VP) are only things that are defined individually.
General characteristics and signs
What characteristics do objects of property law have:
- Everything (VP) for an object can be found in legislative acts. For example, rights of obligation are not enshrined in law.
- Absolute protection is typical for objects (VP). If human rights are violated from the outside, then this is enshrined in law. When a third party has temporary rights, he will also be protected by law. As a result, protection can occur even without the initiative or protection of the owner.
- The right to follow an object is inherent in (VP). This suggests that a person can retain rights that have already passed to the new owner. An example is when a thing has passed illegally to another owner, the real owner can return his legal rights.
- A certain thing acts as an object.
- The (VP) for the object is of an indefinite nature.
What is meant by the content of an object (OC)? This content includes 3 main points (characteristics):
- possession (regardless of);
- use;
- order.
Disposition - it allows, in a legal sense, to determine the fate of a thing. The owner can change its ownership, purpose and condition.
To video objects (VP):
Types and elements in civil law
All (VP) are divided into 2 types: limited real rights and property rights.
- Ownership of the object. The owner has all the rights to own, use and dispose of the thing. A person can dispose of a thing as he pleases. Only these rights should not in any way violate the law and the rights of other people. Also, none of the other entities that have similar rights limit their property rights in any way. The will of the owner and the law limit the amount that a person can have. From the right of ownership, any other (VP) is derived. When the owner transfers any part of the property for temporary possession, he retains all rights to this thing. Therefore, no one except the owner will be endowed.
- Limited rights to an object. They mean absolute control over a thing that does not belong to him. These rights are derived from those rights that are vested in the owner of this thing. They are to some extent limited, unlike the rights of the owner. Moreover, all of them are fully protected by law.
Limited rights, in turn, are divided into 2 groups:
- The ownership of the object by legal entities and the ownership of the property of another owner are limited;
- For the use of someone else's land, for example.
It is also important to know and understand the basic
It is important to know and understand
As (VP) developed, its objects also became more diverse. Previously, objects could be a specific defined thing. Nowadays, even entire complexes often become targets.
In a narrower sense, the concept of property is used, for example, in inheritance law: the inherited property includes things, property rights and obligations of the testator, with the exception of those that are inextricably linked with his personality; personal non-property rights and other intangible benefits are not included in the inherited property (Article 1112 of the Civil Code). In a number of norms of civil legislation, the concept of property is used to refer to the totality of things and property rights (clause 1 of Article 56 of the Civil Code) or even just things (clause 2 of Article 15, clause 2 of Article 46, Articles 301-303, 305 , 307 Civil Code).
Things as objects of civil rights
A thing can be created by man or have a natural origin. As objects of the material world, things are tangible and, depending on their type, have certain characteristics: mass, area, volume, location in space, external features, etc. Things in the civil legal sense are objects whose value is recognized by a person and which he can influence and control. Objects that a person is on at this stage development is not able to master, control, evaluate, make a subject of circulation, they are not considered things from a legal point of view - they are not involved in the sphere of civil regulation (for example, space objects: planets, stars, comets). Things are also characterized by one degree or another of isolation, which may be the result of human efforts, for example, atmospheric nitrogen is not a thing, but liquid nitrogen placed in a special container is subject to the legal regime of things.
The concept of things in the legal sense differs from the commonly used one. Thus, the regime of things is established by civil law for living beings (wild and domestic animals), land plots and isolated water bodies, apartments in residential buildings, energy resources and raw materials extracted and used by humans. In addition to their natural properties, things also differ in their intended and economic purpose and consumer value. The legal regime of a particular group of things reflects these differences and allows things to be classified on various grounds.
Classification of things
When distinguishing between movable and immovable things, the legislator first of all proceeds from their natural properties. Immovable things (real estate, real estate) include land plots, subsoil plots, separate water bodies and everything that is firmly connected to the land, i.e. objects, the movement of which without disproportionate damage to their purpose is impossible, including forests, perennial plantings, buildings, structures, unfinished construction objects (clause 1 of article 130 of the Civil Code).
The defining feature that allows an object to be classified as real estate is, therefore, its strong connection with the land. Moreover, it does not matter whether the thing is of natural origin or created by human hands, whether it rises above the surface of the earth (buildings, structures), whether it is part, a variety of this surface itself (land plots, water bodies) or hidden in the depths of the earth (subsoil areas , tunnels and metro stations).
If there is no strong connection with the land, the object is not real estate. Thus, prefabricated and mobile pavilions that do not have a foundation are not classified as real estate; tree seedlings. The forest growing in the taiga is subject to the legal regime of real estate, and cut down trees become movable property.
A number of objects that have no connection with the land are also subject by law to the legal regime of real estate: these are aircraft and sea vessels subject to state registration, inland navigation vessels, and space objects. The reason for classifying these objects as real estate are special beneficial features, stipulating the need for stricter legal regulation of the relations arising in connection with them.
The legal regime of real estate can be extended by law to other objects that do not have a direct connection with the land. For example, laws define real estate as apartments, rooms in apartments, and other residential premises in residential buildings and other buildings suitable for permanent and temporary residence (Clause 1, Article 16 of the Housing Code); non-residential premises located in buildings and structures (Article 1 of the Law on State Registration of Rights to Real Estate).
Special property item Art. 132 of the Civil Code refers to an enterprise as a property complex used to carry out business activities. It includes all types of property intended for the operation of the enterprise, including land plots, buildings, structures, structures, equipment, inventory, raw materials, products, claims, debts, as well as rights to designations that individualize the enterprise, its products, works and services (brand name, trademarks, service marks), and other exclusive rights, unless otherwise provided by law or contract. An enterprise within the meaning of this norm is an object of law. This concept should not be confused with another meaning of the specified term used for the corporate name of unitary enterprises - subjects of law (Articles 113-115 of the Civil Code).
An enterprise as an object of real estate acts as an object of turnover as a single whole. It is possible, however, to carry out transactions in relation to individual components of this object. Concluding a transaction with an enterprise as a property complex does not affect the existence of the legal entity to which this complex belongs. For example, when an enterprise of a legal entity - a debtor is sold during the application of bankruptcy procedures, the legal entity itself continues to exist, and the proceeds from the sale of its enterprise are included in the property of the debtor.
Civil legislation does not contain the concept or list of movable property. This is not necessary, since it is determined that things not classified by law as real estate are movable (clause 2 of Article 130 of the Civil Code). Movable things, therefore, include money, securities, other material objects of civil rights, primarily various kinds of goods, things for household and individual use.
The peculiarity of the legal regime of real estate is that transactions with it must be concluded in writing, and real rights to it, as well as restrictions, emergence, transfer and termination of these rights, are subject to state registration (clause 1 of article 131 of the Civil Code, p. 1 Article 4 of the Law on State Registration of Rights to Real Estate).
State registration is an act that recognizes and confirms the emergence, limitation (encumbrance), transfer or termination of real rights to real estate, as well as an act that gives legal force a number of transactions with such property (Clause 1, Article 2 of the Law on State Registration of Rights to Real Estate). State registration has legal significance, i.e. rights to real estate arise from the moment of their state registration.
State registration is carried out by specially authorized bodies. Currently, such a body is the Federal Service for State Registration, Cadastre and Cartography within the Ministry of Economic Development of Russia.
State registration is carried out by making an appropriate entry in the Unified State Register of Rights to Real Estate and Transactions with It. To confirm registration, the copyright holder is issued a certificate.
State registration of real estate has the property of public reliability: the registered right from the moment of its registration is considered legally valid, and when making transactions, subjects can trust the information entered in the Unified State Register of Rights to Real Estate and Transactions with It. Any entities can obtain information about the ownership and rights to a property from the Register upon request. The copyright holder, in turn, has the right to receive information about which persons requested information about the real estate property owned by him.
State registration of certain types of real estate is carried out in the manner established by special laws - the Law on State Registration of Rights to Real Estate does not apply to them (Clause 1, Article 4 of the said Law). For example, civil aircraft are registered in the State Register of Civil aircraft RF (Article 33 of the Air Code). Sea vessels - in the State Ship Register, in the ship book or bareboat charter register (Article 33 of the KTM).
Whether a thing belongs to movable or immovable property affects the legal regulation of relations related to it within the framework of various institutions of civil law. For example, foreclosure on movable and immovable property that is the subject of a pledge is applied differently (clauses 1, 2 of Article 349 of the Civil Code), there are features of the definition of the subject in contracts of sale and purchase, lease of real estate objects in comparison with the general rules about these contracts (Article 554, paragraph 1 of Article 654 of the Civil Code).
II. Things defined by generic characteristics and individually defined things. Immovable things are always individually defined, as well as unique, one-of-a-kind things. Things determined by measure, weight, number are generic.
The line between individually defined and generic things is not immutable, established once and for all. The status of a thing as individually defined or generic largely depends on the subject of which relationships it acts. The subjects of these relations can, by their own will, individualize a thing, distinguishing it from the generic ones, for example, if it is necessary to make a transaction with it.
The legal significance of the difference between individually defined and generic things is that individually defined things are irreplaceable: their destruction terminates the debtor’s obligation to transfer things to the creditor due to the impossibility of fulfillment. The death of a ancestral thing does not terminate the obligation: based on a principle rooted in Roman law, “the gens cannot perish”; In this case, the same number of things of the same kind and quality is subject to transfer. If the subject of the transaction is a generic thing, then regardless of which of the existing set of things is transferred under this transaction, the obligation will be considered properly fulfilled. If the subject of the obligation is an individually defined thing, the transfer of this particular thing will be recognized as its proper fulfillment. Only individual things can be demanded in kind from the obligated person through a claim based on an obligation or a proprietary (vindication) claim.
III. Consumable and non-consumable things.
This division is also conditional. “Eternal” things practically do not exist, so it must be borne in mind that this difference is solely of a legal nature.
Consumed items during operation (usually single use) completely lose their consumer properties - they are destroyed or transformed into a qualitatively different item. For example, food products are destroyed (cease to exist) in the process of consumption; During the construction of a house, building materials and fertilizers, after being applied to the soil, lose their independent existence and become part of the house, part of the soil. Unconsumable items for a long time retain their consumer properties and lose them gradually (depreciate). Non-consumable things include all real estate, as well as many movable things: a car, furniture, a telephone, a computer, etc.
Classifying things as consumable or non-consumable predetermines the possibility of them being the subject of certain relationships. The subject of a loan agreement can only be generic consumable things (Article 807 of the Civil Code), while the subject of a lease agreement can be individually defined non-consumable things (Articles 607, 689 of the Civil Code).
IV. Divisible and indivisible things.
As objects of the material world, things are divisible in the physical sense. However, in civil law the classification of things is legal, i.e. determines the legal regime of things, and does not reveal their natural properties.
Divisible is a thing that can be divided into parts capable of being used for the same purpose as the original thing. An indivisible thing is one that cannot be divided into independent parts without losing its purpose. For example, a piano washing machine, the calculator, of course, can be disassembled into parts, but in this case their purpose will be lost - the parts cannot be used for the same purposes for which whole things were used.
The distinction between divisible and indivisible things is important when determining the solidary nature of an obligation (Article 322 of the Civil Code) or when dividing common property and allocating a share (Article 252 of the Civil Code): a divisible thing is divided between the participants in common property, while an indivisible thing is transferred one of them, and he pays the others compensation for the value of their shares.
Complex things are considered legally indivisible. A complex thing is a thing formed from heterogeneous things that involve their use for a general purpose (Article 134 of the Civil Code). Examples are a furniture or jewelry set, a service. Since a complex thing is indivisible from a legal point of view, a transaction made regarding a complex thing, as a rule, applies to all its component parts. Transferring a set of upholstered furniture for use means that all the items included in this set (chairs, sofas) are transferred to the user. The obligation to transfer a complex item will be considered fulfilled only from the moment of transfer of the last item included in its composition.
However, since the components of a complex thing may well be used separately from each other, the parties to the contract have the right to provide, for example, for the transfer of individual objects included in its composition, i.e. establish the divisibility of a complex thing.
V. The main thing and its accessory (Article 135 of the Civil Code) are heterogeneous things, separable from each other. In this case, a thing called an accessory is intended to serve the main thing, which has independent meaning. The accessory is designed to ensure the integrity, safety of the main item or the possibility of its effective use (for example, a case for glasses, a picture frame). Belonging is connected to the main thing by a common purpose and follows the fate of the main thing. This means that under a transaction according to which the main thing is transferred, all its accessories must also be transferred, and, unless the parties have agreed otherwise, it is considered that the price specified in the contract includes the price of both the main thing and its accessories. However, the parties, by agreement, can change the rule regarding the following of ownership to the fate of the main thing, agreeing that only the main thing or only the accessory is subject to transfer.
It is necessary to distinguish between accessories that exist independently, separately from the main thing, and components (components), as well as spare parts. Components and components are structurally connected to the thing itself, forming it (for example, a bicycle handlebar, piano keys). Spare parts are used to replace components that need it; rights to them are acquired independently of the main item. For example, guitar strings are an integral part of this instrument and, if necessary, can be replaced with a spare set of strings.
In the process of being in civil circulation and exploitation (use), things can bring any income, material or monetary gain. Depending on the nature of these receipts and the method of obtaining them, they are called fruits, products or income. Fruits are a natural result of the development of plants and animals (the harvest of fruit or berry trees and shrubs, the offspring of livestock, cow's milk, poultry eggs). Products are property obtained as a result of purposeful production activities (processed raw materials, semi-finished products, finished products). Income - cash and other income that property brings in while in civil circulation (rent, interest on deposits, dividends, etc.). In a number of cases, the concept of “income” should be interpreted broadly and understood as all income received from the use of things (see, for example, Article 303 of the Civil Code).
Article 136 of the Civil Code establishes general rule, according to which the fruits, products and income from the use of property belong to the person using the property legally (owner, tenant, etc.). However, the law, other legal acts or agreement may provide exceptions to this rule, i.e. fruits, products and income can also be independent objects of transactions. Such rules are contained, for example, in Art. 346 of the Civil Code, which reserves (as a general rule) the right to receive fruits, products and income from the pledged property to its owner, but not to the pledgee.
Money
As objects of the material world (things), money exists in the form of banknotes: paper (banknotes, bank notes) or metal (coins) - and is the object of property rights. The release of money into circulation (emission) is a monopoly right of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation (Bank of Russia), granted to it by law. Banknotes and coins of the Bank of Russia are an unconditional obligation of the Bank of Russia and are backed by all its assets.
Monetary obligations must be expressed in rubles (clause 1 of Article 317 of the Civil Code). Payments by direct transfer of banknotes are called cash. In order to prevent an increase in the money supply in circulation, a maximum amount has been established within which payments can be made in cash by legal entities for one transaction: 100 thousand rubles. The maximum amount of cash payments for citizens has not been established.
Another form of existence of money is funds in accounts in banks and other credit institutions. In this case, money does not exist in material form, but in the form of entries in accounts; calculations are made by changing these entries and are called non-cash. A record of a certain amount of money in an account essentially confirms the existence of the account owner's right of obligation in relation to the bank in which the account is opened.
Money refers to movable, generic, fungible and divisible things. This is explained by the fact that the essence and value of money lies not in its material form, but in the amount that is expressed by this form. At the same time, banknotes can also act as individually defined things, for example, if they are collectibles or individualized through special marks, recording banknote numbers (for example, they act as physical evidence). In these cases, money becomes indivisible, irreplaceable things and can be the subject of contracts of sale, exchange, or the object of claim under a vindication claim (Article 301 of the Civil Code).
In cases, in the manner and under the conditions provided for by law or in the order established by it, foreign currency can also be used on the territory of the Russian Federation (clause 2 of Article 140, clause 3 of Article 317 of the Civil Code).
The classification of objects of law is not an easy task. Since there is no uniform solution to the question of what should be understood under the object of law, and since the question of the object of law in relation to some legal
23 See V. G. Alexandrov. Legality and legal relations in Soviet society, p. 120.
Bourgeois authors (Becker, Gierke, Trubetskoy) often mention a person as an object of law, moreover, they mean that a person is an object of law not only in a slave-owning society, but also in a capitalist society.
An attempt to give a classification of objects of law is made by N. M. Korkunov. In accordance with his concept of law as a delimitation of interests, he says: “The object of law can be everything that serves as a means of realizing interests delimited by law. But all our interests are realized only with the help of some force. Therefore, in general we can say that the object of rights is forces” 24. Based on this, N. M. Korkunov distinguishes the following four categories of objects: 1) the subject’s own forces, 2) the forces of nature, 3) the forces of other people and 4) the forces society.
This classification cannot be considered successful, firstly, because the very concept of “force” is very ambiguous, and it is not clear in what sense it is used by the author; secondly, because the object of morality is not “forces” as such , and certain manifestations of them that can become the subject of legal domination (for example, a thing, as some manifestation of the “forces” of nature, an action, as a manifestation of the physical or spiritual strength of another person, etc.); thirdly, in view of this that it is difficult to imagine that the “forces of society” could become the object of the right of an individual.
Usually, however, both in bourgeois literature and in our Soviet literature, there are not classifications, but lists of what can be the object of law. One of the most complete lists is contained in the “Theory of State and Law” by A.I. Denisov, where the following four groups of objects of law are indicated: 1) the results of action, inaction or abstention from action; 2) things, i.e. material goods; 3) some spiritual products; 4) personal benefits, i.e. benefits inseparable from the human person: bodily integrity, health, personal
24 N. M. Korkunov. Lectures on general theory rights. SPb., 18S4, p. 154.
freedom, honor and dignity of a person 25. G. I. Petrov gives the following list of objects of morality: “...material and spiritual values, bringing people, in respect of which the will of the state is expressed, and personal non-material benefits” 25.
These are examples of “pluralistic”, in the words of L. I. Petrazhitsky 27, doctrines about the object of law. They are opposed by various “monistic” theories of objects of law, which recognize the object of law as something single, homogeneous (for example, only things, or only actions and abstentions from action, or the will of other persons, or “forces,” as we saw in the above Korshunov classification).
The recognition of a thing as the only object of law, as well as the recognition as such only of actions and behavior of persons, is based on incorrect ideas about the relationship between the content of rights and obligations, on the one hand, and the object of law, on the other. Therefore, the only justified one is the “pluralistic” theory of objects of law.
The legal relationship is aimed at ensuring the legal dominance of a person over the following objects: a) a thing, b) actions of obligated persons, c) actions of the rights of other persons, d) products of spiritual CREATIVITY.
It seems to us that “personal benefits”, inseparable from the human person, including such intangible benefits belonging to a person as the honor and dignity of a person, can be reduced to the actions of an authorized person and to the actions of obligated persons, and therefore we. We do not separate them into a special category of objects of law. But we consider it very important to distinguish the actions of an authorized person as a special type of objects of law.
In the field of socialist state and administrative law, with its broad attention to the interests of the individual, and partly in the field of civil law,
25 A. I. Denisov. Theory of Government and Rights. M., Yuri "zdat,
1948, pp. 456-457.
26 G. I. Petrov. Soviet administrative-legal relations
ideas.- “Scientific notes of the Leningrad Law Institute
ta." L., Vt. VI, 1954, p. 51.
87 See L.I. Petrazhitsky. Theory of Law and State, vol. P. SSh„ 1907, p. 414,
From a legal point of view, the authorized person’s own actions become of great importance. In some cases, the rights of a citizen correspond to the responsibilities of more than one specific person: the rights are broader than the powers in a given legal relationship and imply an obligation to abstain for an indefinite number of citizens and officials. This includes rights such as personal integrity, the homes of citizens, their right to free exercise of religious worship and free anti-religious propaganda, their right to use roads, parks, forests, etc.
In this regard, it is appropriate to raise the question: shouldn’t we, instead of talking about the actions (abstinence) of an indefinite number of officials and individuals, proceed from the existence in these cases of a person’s rights to his own actions? Are not the own actions of the authorized person also an object of law along with other types of objects named above (thing, actions of other persons, products of spiritual creativity)?
Some old administrative authorities used the expression “person’s own forces” to designate this type of object. We believe that it is correct to speak, as indicated above, about the authorized person’s own actions as a special object of law, since legal domination is exercised in a certain sphere of the authorized subject’s own actions.
In socialist legal relations, the object of law cannot be persons, which is allowed by some bourgeois lawyers in relation to bourgeois law.
Claims encountered in our judicial practice regarding the removal of a child from one parent and his transfer to military
feeding another ™ do not indicate the parents’ right to the child’s personality. We are talking about “official” rights (parents, about their parental power, which, like any power, from the legal side is not a right to the individual, but a set of rights to the actions of another person and to the own actions of the person authorized in the interests of the child. It should be noted that this, that there are rights that are at the same time responsibilities - “services”
Ё3 See, for example, the resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the USSR of February 9, 1956 in the case of Isakhanova with Magopok oo the removal of a child (((Judicial practice", 1956, K 3, p. 5)...
“real” rights, rights to one’s own actions, protected by the protection of any third party and at the same time constituting the duty of the entitled person in relation to the child and socialist society.
The preconception that only the actions of an obligated person can be the object of law puts some of our civilists in a difficult position when trying to understand the essence of personal non-property rights. Thus, K.F. Egorov, the author of an article specifically devoted to the issue of personal non-property rights, writes: “... it should be recognized as indisputable that the action of the most “legal” person cannot be the object of a legal relationship. After all, the essence of any subjective right (understood as an element of a legal relationship) comes down to the fact that it determines the proper behavior of the obligated person in order to ensure the behavior (action) of the most obligated person, aimed at satisfying his legitimate interests. It is clear, therefore, that an authorized administrator cannot simultaneously act in two capacities, i.e., bear any obligations in relation to himself.” 29. Having encountered the conclusion that the actions of an authorized person constitute the object of human rights, the author dogmatically rejects it, citing to the firmly acquired idea that the object of law can only be the actions of obligated persons.
As a result of these considerations, the author comes to the contradictory conclusion that *personal non-property rights are not subjective civil rights, in the special meaning of this concept they constitute a special category of civil rights.”30 But if personal non-property rights are not subjective civil rights, then the question arises: What kind of civil rights are they? The author, of course, cannot and does not give an answer to this question, limiting himself to pointing out that these rights “have a completely different legal nature than subjective property.” turnip civil rights"3".
29 K. F. Egorov. Personal non-property rights of citizens of the USSR, - “Scientific Notes of Leningrad State University”, No. 151, 1953, etr. Sh. ae Ibid., p. 156. 31 Not there, p. 157-
Regarding the question of things as objects of law, it should be borne in mind that the legal division of things into types in socialist law takes into account the economic * difference of things.
In capitalist law, a more or less unified concept of a thing is possible, corresponding to the economic concept of a commodity, although bourgeois law also knows the category of things withdrawn from circulation, “public things” that are in common use.
In socialist law there is already a significant differentiation of the concept of a thing. The means of production in a socialist society are not goods, and for this reason the classification of things into means of production and means of consumption is crucial for determining the nature and scope of a person’s rights to things. The rights and obligations of persons to a certain extent depend on the nature of the object of law.
In a socialist society, the main means of production are withdrawn from civil circulation or allow limited forms of their circulation. According to Art. 6 of the Constitution of the USSR, all main means of production are state property, i.e., national property. Along with this, there are other categories of things withdrawn from circulation not for economic, but for other reasons, due to their inherent special properties,
Land in the USSR is the property of the state. The nationalization of land, carried out in accordance with the historical decree “On Land” on October 26 (November 8), 1917, abolished forever private ownership of land, put an end to landlordism, and the remnants of feudal relations in the countryside. The nationalization of land opened up a broad path for a radical socialist reorganization of agriculture. "
In people's democracies, land is state or public property, as well as the property of working peasants (see, for example, Articles 6 and 7 of the Constitution of the Hungarian People's Republic: Article 8 of the Constitution of the Romanian People's Republic of 1952, which states: “Land in the Romanian People's Republic People's Republic belongs to those who process it").
Land in the USSR is an object of state socialist property law, a subject
which is the socialist state as a single whole.
However, land is an object of law in many other legal relations. Nationalization of land excludes the right of ownership of land by private individuals or individual state and public organizations, but does not exclude other rights to land, land use rights, as provided for in Art. 21 Civil Code of the RSFSR. Thus, state farms receive land for free and indefinite use, while collective farms have land assigned to them forever. The Institute of Land Use is an institution of property law, where the object of law is land plots, and not the actions of certain persons associated with the provision of these plots for the use of certain persons and their retention. Here is a right that does not correspond to the obligation of a certain person or certain persons. Obligated persons in relation to the land user are an indefinite number of unspecified persons33.
G. A. Akseneiok correctly considers land plots as an object of the right of state farm land use granted to state farms. He says: “All land plots assigned to state farms constitute the state farm land fund, which is part of the agricultural lands of the unified state land fund.
These areas are subject to state farm land use rights” S3.
Land is an object of law in all land legal relations. “Land legal relations in the USSR,” writes G. A. Aksenepok, “differ from all other legal relations precisely in that their object is only land, which cannot be the object of civil and other legal relations in the USSR” 34.
The object of the right of state socialist property is a state enterprise, as stated in Art. 6 of the USSR Constitution. A.V. Karase rightly points out that state institutions
32 Sign of the proprietary nature of the corresponding right.
ae G. A. A k s e i e ch o k. Land use rights of state farms, MTS and subsidiary farms. M., Gosyurizdat, 1953, p. 36.
34 G., A, Aksepepok. Land legal relations in the USSR (Author's abstract of doctoral dissertation). M., 1955, page C,
Acceptances can be considered not only from the point of view of their legal capacity, as subjects of law, but also as a complex object of law, as a certain property complex that makes up “a certain economic whole and organizational unity. The composition of an enterprise as an object of state socialist property rights, - points out A. V. Karase, - includes, first of all, its fixed and circulating production assets, finished products and funds of the enterprise" 36.
But if a state enterprise can be considered as an object of law, as the property of a socialist state, then the collective farm cannot be considered as an object of law. But such a conclusion is obtained when they write that “state enterprises, unlike collective farms, are a public property, and not group property.” 36. A collective farm is also not a group property, but a subject of this property.
A special type of objects of law are the products of spiritual creativity of certain persons. Copyright and invention law deals with this type of objects of law37. These “exclusive” rights are about excluding all other citizens from performing actions that constitute the competence of the subject of these rights. Legal dominance is established over certain works of art or a certain invention, etc. It is these products of spiritual creativity that are the objects of law. Therefore, it is hardly correct to consider that, as an intangible benefit, “authorship” is an object of law, as stated in the “Theory of State and Law” of 1955. These objects of law are usually considered to be a variety of the broader category of “intangible benefits.” However, the rights to intangible benefits, inseparable from the personality of the subject of law
35 A. V. Karas. Right state socialist
property. M., Publishing House of the USSR Academy of Sciences, 1954, p. 67, see also
ae 3. S. Belyaeva. Legal forms and methods of government
management of collective farms. - “Soviet State and Law”,
1955, No. 7, p. 4. " "
37 See V.I. Serebrovsky. Issues of Soviet copyright law. M., Institute of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, 1955, pp. 30-31.
36 See “Theory of State and Law.” Tutorial. M.,
Gosgorizdat, 1955, p. 416.
(name, honor), can be more satisfactorily disclosed as rights to the authorized person’s own actions, as mentioned above.
A huge area of objects of law consists of the actions of obligated persons. They are very diverse in their content and come down to doing something (actions in the proper sense of the word) or abstaining from actions.
Roman jurists, characterizing the actions of obligated persons, reduced these actions to three types: facero, non facere, pati, i.e. do something, abstain from something, endure.
In bourgeois jurisprudence, the prevailing opinion is that “patience” (pati) amounts to abstinence from action and therefore does not constitute a special type of action. L.I. Petrazhitsky defended “patience” as a special type of action, arguing that from a psychological point of view, the obligation to endure something and the obligation to refrain from any action are different phenomena. However, he also agrees that “from a practical point of view, from the point of view of the interests of those people who are dealing with those who are obliged to endure something...” the difference does not matter and patience can be considered as equivalent to abstaining from resisting the .
Therefore, actions as objects of law can be reduced not to three, but to two types: actions and abstentions from actions.
g 3. THE IMPORTANCE OF THE QUESTION ABOUT THE OBJECT OF THE RIGHT
The question of the object of law has direct practical significance. It helps to reveal the purpose pursued by the establishment of certain legal relations. This goal does not always consist in certain actions of the obligated person, which sometimes constitute nothing more than a means to achieve this goal, but in the establishment of legal domination for the right, the nature of which varies precisely depending on what constitutes the object of law.
39 P. I. L etrazh p ts k i i. Theory of law and state, vol. II, St. Petersburg, 1907, etr., 421,
It is well known that in civil legal relations, rights and obligations, with all the features inherent in them, differ precisely in the object of the corresponding rights.
It is also important to note that the object of law in subjective “public” rights is often the authorized person’s own actions. Without this indication, it is difficult to substantiate those individual rights that are usually designated by the concept of “freedom.”
Studying the question “About the object of law can also help reveal the meaning of such rights as the right to life, the right to a name, to honor.
A correct solution to the question of the object of law should dispel the idea found among bourgeois lawyers that a person can be an object of law (in family law). Inclusion in the circle of objects of law of the authorized body's own actions allows us to correctly evaluate the essence of parental rights, the object of which, of course, cannot be the actions of other persons. The right of parents to raise a child, which is at the same time their responsibility, is primarily subject to the actions of the parents themselves. It would be wrong to assert that the object of this right is always the actions of children, since: a) in early age it is impossible to talk at all about the conscious behavior of children, and therefore about their actions as the subject of the rights of parents: b) but also speaking about children who have reached the age when their conscious behavior is revealed, it should be noted that the rights of parents are broader than their rights to act (inaction, suffering) of children and extend to the actions of the most indefinite and indeterminable number of persons who come into contact with parents in the exercise of their parental rights.
In socialist law, the rights and obligations of individuals vary greatly depending on what the object of the law is, that is, what and whose actions or what exactly things constitute the object of the law.
In relation to the actions of economic bodies, for example, the principle of actual fulfillment of the obligations provided for by the plan prevails. Replacing actions stipulated by a contract with other actions constituting their equivalent is, in a number of cases, impossible in socialist law.
1 In a capitalist society, it is almost always possible to replace execution with a monetary equivalent that ensures the purpose of the transaction - profit. In some cases, it is the equivalent that is the purpose of the transaction, and not the actual fulfillment of the obligation (exchange transactions “for difference”).
In a socialist environment, in the relationship between economic entities, the purpose of the transaction is not profit, but a certain economic result, due to which actual fulfillment of obligations is mandatory. In the civil law literature, it was correctly noted that penalties in contracts between government agencies are considered not as compensation for damage, but as a means of stimulating the actual execution of the contract, the accurate and timely fulfillment by economic agencies of their obligations - the customer under the delivery contract cannot make up for what he did not receive in other ways on time under the contract, since he does not have the appropriate funds for these products, no monetary equivalent will be able to compensate him for the shortage that could affect his own implementation of the plan.
However, as has been correctly noted, the requirement of mandatory acceptance of actual performance is unacceptable to contractual relations between private individuals, especially when it comes to refusal to accept improper performance41.
Actions of officials, how. the object of law, on the contrary, does not seem to be absolutely irreplaceable, although often the object of morality is the actions of one specific person, namely a person occupying a particular position who has the necessary competence (the right-obligation to give this or that permission, to accept this or that completed structure, etc. . P.). The structure and nature of the activities of government bodies exclude the indispensability of the actions of officials.
Without dwelling on other aspects of the question of the object of law, we note in conclusion that, as has already been partly indicated, this question undoubtedly has serious significance for the classification of legal relations, and, consequently, for distinguishing between individual branches of law, i.e. for the development the question of the system of socialist law, as well as to determine the structure of individual sectors and individual legal institutions. These questions, however, are beyond the scope of this work.
40 See V.F. Yakovleva. Real fulfillment of obligations -
one zhz necessary conditions performing non-economic activities
plan.- “Scientific notes of the Leningrad Law Institute
ta", vol. VI. L., 1954. See also I.B. But in l: ts k and i. Real
fulfillment of obligations, - “Proceedings of the scientific session of VIUN”,
41 See O. S. Ioffe. Civil protection of interests
personality in the USSR. - “Soviet State and Law”, 1956, No. 2,
Property rights extend to finance, physical and intellectual objects owned by citizens, companies, enterprises or the state.
The interpretation of the concept of “object of property rights” is carried out from a material and legal point of view. In the first case, things are implied, in the second - the behavior of the participants in legal relations.
Basic classification
The legal regime for the protection and regulation of objects of property rights depends on their economic, cultural, historical significance, and physical characteristics.
Free, limited and withdrawn from circulation
Items involved in turnover can be easily transferred between persons; they have universal legal succession. Most objects fall into this category.
Goods that not all participants in legal relations can legally possess are recognized as limited in circulation; they are used under a specific permit. Typical examples are firearms and psychotropic drugs.
The Civil Code contains direct references to seized objects that are not involved in circulation - this is unlimited state property (in particular, the bowels of the earth, nuclear weapons).
Movable and immovable
Immovable objects of ownership are directly related to the land - plots, structures, unfinished construction. They cannot be moved without causing damage. This category includes enterprises, the results of sea, river and air shipbuilding, spaceships and satellites. Water, land and natural resources have a special status.
Movable things move freely between persons and are not tied to the ground.
Individually defined and generic
Individually defined objects are unique (for example, the results of creativity); even in a homogeneous environment, such things are distinguished by personal characteristics. They, unlike generic ones, serve as the object of property rights and are regulated by relevant rights. Generic things are replaceable; they are calculated by measure, quantity, weight.
In addition to the above normative interpretation of the concept, it is customary to include among the objects:
- securities all varieties;
- money in cash and non-cash form;
- the fruits of labor activity and services provided;
- the results of mental work - the entire range of intellectual property;
- property rights;
- protected means of individualization - logos and trademarks;
- various non-property benefits.
Property includes both property rights, for example, intellectual, and materially existing phenomena that are difficult to interpret in the form of familiar things. Here you can bring thermal and electrical energy.
Property of individuals and legal entities
Individuals can own any items available in circulation, as well as an extensive list of real estate. Here we mean not only property complexes, houses and apartments, land plots, but also resources related to the non-profit structures registered by them. The list of movable things is practically unlimited. Citizens have access to liability rights - claims (bank deposits), corporate rights - the opportunity to join joint-stock and other business associations.
Legal entities have access to any objects that have not been withdrawn from circulation and are not limited by the principles of movable and immovable property. This category includes buildings, transport, household and household utensils, raw materials and equipment. Companies (business, joint stock, etc.) that took part in privatization can receive ownership land plot, on which the object passed to them is located.
INFORMATION AS AN OBJECT OF CIVIL RELATIONS
O.V. KIRICHENKO
Information as an object of civil law appeared in Russian legislation on January 1, 1995. According to E.N. Nasonova, “the inclusion of information in civil legal relations became possible in connection with the development of society as a whole - its communication connections, which have a different physical nature. Information has become a real value capable of influencing the property status of members of society - participants in civil legal relations.”
Currently in Art. 128 Civil Code Russian Federation 1994 (hereinafter - the Civil Code of the Russian Federation), containing a list of objects of civil rights, there is no information. It was excluded from this article in connection with the entry into force of Part 4 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation on January 1, 2008.
The issue of recognizing information as an independent object of civil rights is debatable. According to E.A. Sukhanov, it is necessary to consider not any, but only protectable information (trade secret, production secret (know-how)), which can be the object of property law, as an independent object of civil rights. “Abstract information is not an object of civil law; in many cases it is not an object of law at all. In order to be the object of a legal relationship, information must be the object of the subjective civil law of its participant.”
In accordance with paragraph 1 of Art. 1225 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, production secrets (know-how) are protected results of intellectual activity. According to Art. 1465 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, a production secret (know-how) is information of any nature (production, technical, economic, organizational and others), including the results of intellectual activity in the scientific and technical field, as well as information about methods of implementation professional activity, which have actual or potential commercial value due to their unknownness to third parties, to which third parties do not have free access legally and in respect of which the owner of such information has introduced a trade secret regime.
Of course, production secrets (know-how) are objects of information relations, of which there are currently a lot. The object of these relations is also information of an economic, social, scientific, socio-political and other nature.
According to V.A. Dozortsev, in a broad sense, information can be understood as any information transmitted on any basis. This includes, in particular, the transfer of information related to the sphere of production, which is only a prerequisite practical use and not having independent significance, as well as information that is valuable not as such, but in connection with their practical application. At the same time, from the entire mass of information relations, special group, characterized by the following main features. Firstly, the object of such relations is information, information as such, in a separate form. Secondly, they represent a special product that is transferred to other persons through the market as an object of economic turnover and, as such, has commercial value. Thirdly, the information should not be publicly available, otherwise there would be no object of transfer; the object would not be the information, but its use (see:).
Special information relations and the right to information appear only on the condition that the reported information acquires independent value, independent of its use, when the information itself is clearly isolated and that is why, as such, it participates in economic circulation. The meaning of identifying information relations as a separate category lies in the emerging need to include their object in economic circulation and to create for this legal framework. Outside of this task, their identification is generally pointless (see:).
Only non-public, confidential information is of value for economic turnover, and, accordingly, only it can be the object of civil law, and such information can be different and cannot always be reduced to know-how. Closer to the right to information is the right to know-how, based on data confidentiality. This right has as its content the transfer of information, but not as such, but for the purpose of its subsequent practical use.
Know-how arose in connection with the emergence of a need to protect any results that may be of commercial value, not predetermined either by their nature or by the field to which they relate.
The legal regime of know-how has significant differences from traditional exclusive rights. In this regard, several circumstances should be noted. Know-how exists as long as data about it remains inaccessible to others. Strictly speaking, it is not know-how as such that is protected, but the inviolability of the personal sphere of its owner.
Know-how is valid as long as it is kept confidential and inaccessible. It is also protected in the case when data about it is transferred, usually under a contract, to another person on the basis of confidentiality. It’s just that the scope of know-how is narrowed to the persons who rightfully possess it.
Know-how does not apply to persons to whom it is lawfully known, for example, to those who have lawfully independently created a similar achievement. Such a person has the right to freely use the decision he received. It may even turn out that the know-how for similar solutions independently belongs to different persons - the original owner and the repeat creator. In this case, the know-how belongs to each of them. Thus, the scope of know-how is further narrowed.
The right to information is also based on confidentiality and represents the second branch of rights based on confidentiality, along with know-how. Therefore, the previously discussed features relating to know-how fully apply to the right to information.
The transfer of information can be carried out for various purposes. Previously, it was most often produced for the purpose of use, practical application. Relationships regarding information develop when it comes to communicating knowledge as such, when they themselves are of interest.
To highlight a special group of information relations in civil law, it is important that the transfer of information is carried out in the process of economic turnover, on a reimbursable basis.
IN modern world the fact of knowledge itself is important, even regardless of the right to use. Information as such, even outside of its use, is an independent commodity. It has become an object of economic turnover, a sphere of special professional activity.
The object of information relations is the intangible result of labor, information, knowledge as such, regardless of their use. At the same time, the rights to know-how and information differ significantly. Rights to know-how are traditionally built on the model of exclusive rights. They aim to use the data that constitutes know-how. The prohibition of disclosure is established only so that the right itself continues to exist. The roots of know-how lie in patent system, when, simultaneously with the patent license, some additional data relating to the implementation of the invention was transferred. This is the so-called mixed license. And only the next type is a license, under which the copyright holder transfers production secrets and even undertakes to assist in the implementation of the decision. In terms of know-how, information alone is of no use to anyone at all.
The content of the right to transmit information is only the communication of data. No rights to use practical use it does not include this data. The transfer of data and knowledge is cut off from the right of use, isolated from it. In this case, we are talking specifically about the transfer of data on a confidential basis, and not about their publication, which excludes the very right to transfer data.
The different contents of the right to know-how and to information also predetermine differences in the relationships regarding their transfer. If know-how involves granting the right to use the transferred object, issuing permission for such use, then this is nothing more than the issuance of a license, a licensing relationship. When transferring information, no right is transferred, no permission is required - there is a simple actual transfer of information, for which, as a rule, the free use regime applies. There is no place or basis for any permissions or licensing relations. Another content of the law corresponds to the difference in the nature of relations in economic turnover, differences in the legal nature of the grounds for the transfer of an object.
To answer the question of whether information is an independent object of civil rights, it is necessary to understand what it is.
As noted by O.A. Gavrilov, “information is one of the fundamental characteristics of the universe, along with matter, energy, space, time. Information is an attribute of matter and consciousness. But it is not material and is associated with such properties of matter as reflection, structure, diversity. Information cannot exist outside material carrier - a physical object...". Further O.A. Gavrilov emphasizes that “the form of existence of information is movement (information is a “migrating structure”). Constantly circulating in the physical or social environment, it satisfies people’s needs for communication and interaction.” It is clear that these features are characteristic of any type of information.
In accordance with Art. 2 Federal Law dated July 27, 2006 N 149-FZ “On information, information technology and on the protection of information" (hereinafter - Federal Law N 149-FZ) information is "information (messages, data) regardless of the form of their presentation." From this definition it follows that information cannot be the object of legal relations regardless of its content. Function information in society - the mediation of communication, connections between people. In this case, information is objectified in reality. Forms of information can be oral speech, images (text, drawing, symbols), actions (gesture, result of actions), physical signals (magnetic, electrical, radio -, light, sound, nervous, etc.) (see:).
Depending on the various characteristics information can be classified. Thus, according to the content, artistic, political, economic, scientific, legal, technical, everyday information, etc. are distinguished. According to qualitative characteristics - reliable and unreliable, timely and untimely, complete and incomplete (sufficient and insufficient), useful and useless (for a specific case or subject), known and unknown, relevant and irrelevant (significant and insignificant). Depending on the medium on which it is located, information can be divided into that possessed by an intelligent system (intelligent being, artificial intelligence), and located on a tangible medium. The latter, in turn, is divided into information located on a natural medium (stone, wood, sand, etc.), and information located on an artificial medium (recorded indirectly on a device specially designed for this purpose: paper, fabric, magnetic, digital media, etc.). According to the source of origin, information can be internal (created by the subject independently) or external (received by the subject from the outside). Depending on the method of broadcasting, dynamic (transmitted using different signals) and static information (transmitted along with the medium on which it is recorded) are distinguished (see:).
IN modern conditions The question of information as an object of law is especially relevant. An indispensable condition is the question of identifying information and its isolation. Only a separate part of information that can be identified and, to a certain extent, individualized, can become the object of a legal relationship. Both a certain range of information (for example, environmental information) and an indefinite range of information (for example, any information that has actual or potential value due to its unknown to third parties) can be isolated (see:).
Legal science has developed several provisions that are key in determining the place of information in legal relations. Firstly, legal relations in the information sphere are characterized by indicating that such legal relations arise in connection with and regarding actions with information (see:). Secondly, the only essential feature of legal relations in the information sphere is their object - certain type material, spiritual and social benefits associated with information as a result of the behavior of a participant in a legal relationship (providing, receiving, non-disclosure of information, etc.) (see:). In this regard, it is quite logical to consider information as an object of civil legal relations.
Based on the content of Art. 128 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, we can conclude that information acts in legal relations as an object in the form of intangible benefits, results of intellectual activity (intellectual property), information itself. In the first case, information acts as an object in relations to protect the honor and dignity of an individual, a person’s name, business reputation, etc. In the second, it is an object of intellectual property rights. It seems that the concept of information legal relations should cover the last of the listed cases, since information is the object of information legal relations, which can be different. The purpose of information relations is to obtain, transmit information or limit these actions, regardless of their further use. Naturally, these relationships also require legal protection, and not just know-how.
In addition, relations of this nature are based on Part 4 of Art. 29 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation of 1993: “Everyone has the right to freely seek, receive, transmit, produce and disseminate information in any legal way.” The right contained in it should be recognized as an intangible benefit in accordance with Art. 150 Civil Code of the Russian Federation. Relations based on this norm are carried out by each person independently and freely, regardless of any conditions (general regulatory relations). To ensure their implementation, it is sufficient for the right to protect this intangible benefit from encroachments and violations. The situation is similar with personal and family secrets (see:).
An important prerequisite for the ability of information to act as an object of legal regulation is its isolation as an object of relations. It is obvious that in order to involve any object in economic circulation, it must first be isolated in such a way that a specific subject has the opportunity to individually own, use and dispose of the object, i.e. information must become the object of subjective law.
The ways to isolate information as an object of intellectual property are: a) recognition by the object of the right to the results of intellectual creativity, subject to their unique form; b) recognition by the object of the right to the result of intellectual activity, which has the ability to bring practical results, on the basis of artificial formalization and description of its content (in in this case exclusive rights perform a function in relation to information similar to the right to a thing); c) restriction of access to information.
According to Art. 5 of Federal Law N 149-FZ information is an object of legal relations, i.e. any information can become the object of civil rights, both unlimited and limited in access. Thus, information limited in its access, including various information, and not just production secrets and trade secrets, can also be classified as an object of civil rights.
Bibliography
1. Gavrilov O.A. Informatization of the Russian legal system: theoretical and practical problems. M., 2008. P. 10.
2. Gunin D.I. Information as an object of legal regulation // Russian legal journal. Ekaterinburg: Publishing house UrGUA. 2008. N 4. P. 182 - 184.
3. Dozortsev V.A. Intellectual rights: Concept. System. Codification tasks: Sat. articles. M.: Statute, 2005. P. 223.
4. Nasonova E.N. Information as an object of civil law: Dis. ...cand. legal Sci. M., 2002. P. 13.
5. Prospects for the development of civil legislation in Russia: plans and modern realities: Interview with E.A. Sukhanov. Access from SPS "ConsultantPlus".
6. Rassolov M.M. Information law: Uch. village M., 1999. P. 47.
7. Sitnikov A.L., Tumanova L.V. Ensuring and protecting the rights to information. M., 2001. P. 118.
Our company provides assistance in writing coursework and theses, as well as master's theses on the subject of Information Law, we invite you to use our services. All work is guaranteed.
