Nujna pot v najnovejši sodni praksi

diplomsko delo

Neža Suhodolčan (Author), Renato Vrenčur (Mentor)

Abstract

Institut nujne poti posega v samo lastninsko pravico, ki predstavlja »najvišjo« pravno oblast, ki jo ima pravni subjekt nad pravnim objektom, in je eden ključnih pojmov vsakega pravnega reda . Lastninska pravica je veljala za neomejeno že po rimskem pravu vendar so kljub temu že tedaj obstajale določene posebnosti pri urejanju medsebojnih razmerij med sosedi . Pravni red v Republiki Sloveniji priznava pravico do zasebne lastnine celo v Ustavi Republike Slovenije, in sicer 33. člen določa: »Zagotovljena je pravica do zasebne lastnine in dedovanja.« Sicer pa lahko lastninska pravica konkurira z drugo lastninsko pravico, zato lahko neomejeno izvrševanje ene do njiju onemogoči izvrševanje druge lastninske pravice. Prav zaradi tega pravni redi predpisujejo pravila, ki rešujejo tako nastale kolizije pravnih oblasti glede nepremičnin . Ta pravila se imenujejo sosedsko pravo. Namen pravil o sosedskem pravu je posledica življenja v skupnosti in na skupnem prostoru in da se morajo ljudje drug drugemu prilagajati, da ne bi prihajalo do sporov med lastniki nepremičnin, katere so medsebojno dotikajo. Ta pravila lastnika po eni strani omejujejo, po drugi strani pa omogočajo normalno izvrševanje njegove lastninske pavice. Eno izmed poglavji sosedskega prava je osrednja tema te diplomske naloge, in sicer institut nujne poti, ki po našem pravu pomeni omejitev lastninske pravice v obliki posebne stvarne služnosti. Ustanovi se prisilno, s pravnomočno odločbo, kar jasno nakazuje, da institut nujne poti predstavlja velik in nezaželen poseg v lastninsko pravico lastnika obremenjene nepremičnine in ga pri tem ovira pri izvrševanju njegove »svete« pravice. Institut nujne poti je tako treba močno omejevati, kar nakazuje že samo ime, nujna pot, in njena zahteva naj bo res vložena predvsem tedaj, kadar ni druge možnosti, torej kadar ne bo mogoče doseči soglasja o služnosti in ko bi alternativa nujni poti, torej ureditev lastne poti, predstavljala za predlagatelja nesorazmerno visok strošek. V diplomskem delu sem na začetku pojasnila osnovne pojme, ki so ključni za nadaljnje razumevanje tematike, in sicer predstavila sem pojem lastninske pravice in pravico do zasebne lastnine, ki je absolutna in ki ne sme biti vezana na rok ali pogoj, razen seveda če zakon tako določa. Glede na dejstvo, da nujna pot predstavlja omejitev lastninske pravice sem malo bolj podrobno predstavila tudi to. Nadalje sem pojasnila pojem sosedskega prava, katerega nujna pot je tradicionalen institut. Ne nazadnje sem predstavila sam institut nujne poti, predstavila sem njegovo definicijo, na kakšen način se ustanovi, spremeni in preneha. Ob zaključku teoretičnih razlag posameznega instituta sem dodala pripadajočo sodno prakso in pri tem skušala ugotoviti kako si je sodna praksa enotna, kako si razlaga institut nujne poti.

Keywords

diplomska dela;

Data

Language:	Slovenian
Year of publishing:	2016
Typology:	2.11 - Undergraduate Thesis
Organization:	UM PF - Faculty of Law
Publisher:	[N. Suhodolčan]
UDC:	349.4(043.2)
COBISS:	5305899
Views:	1472
Downloads:	235
Average score:	0 (0 votes)
Metadata:

Other data

Secondary language:	English
Secondary title:	WAY OF NECESSITY IN A NEWEST CASE LAW
Secondary abstract:	The institute of the way of necessity interferes with property right, which is the highest legal authority of the legal entity over the legal object and represents one of the key concepts in every legal order. Property right was considered to be unlimited in Roman law, although there were certain particularities regarding the relationships between neighbors within it. The legal order of the Republic of Slovenia acknowledges property right in the Constitution with the provision in Article 33 on the ‘right to private property and inheritance rights’. Property right may be compromised by another property right, meaning that the unlimited execution of one right may preclude the execution of the other. Because of this, the legal order stipulates rules regarding the collisions of legal authorities in matters of property disputes. These rules are referred to as neighbor law. Their purpose is to ensure that people respect and adjust to their shared living space in order to avoid disputes between the owners of adjacent property. On the one hand, these rules limit the owner, while allowing them to execute their property right on the other. The topic of this thesis is the way of necessity institute within the neighbor law, which is in itself a type of property right restriction in the form of real easement. It is instated coercively, enforcing res judicata, which clearly shows that the institute of way of necessity represents a major, undesired breach of the property right of the owner of the compromised property by interfering with the sanctity of their property right. This is why this thesis proposes that the way of necessity institute be heavily restricted as the name alone - way of necessity - suggests. Its application should be restricted to situations where there are no other alternatives, meaning that no agreement on easement can be made or that the alternative to way of necessity, namely creating a new way, would represent a disproportionately large cost for the easement holder. In the first part of the thesis, basic concepts essential for further understanding of the topic are explained. These include the property right and the right to private property. The latter is absolute and should not be restricted by any conditions or deadlines, unless it is required by the law. Considering that way of necessity imposes a limitation on the right to private property, the thesis provides detailed insight into this as well. Further in the thesis, the concept of neighbor law is discussed, within which the way of necessity is a traditional institute. A definition of the institute of way of necessity is also provided with a focus on the processes of establishing, altering and terminating the institute. The theoretical treatment of each institute is followed by a corresponding example from case law, where an attempt to establish the uniformity of the case law and its interpretation is made.
Secondary keywords:	property right;neighbor law;way of necessity;real easement;dominant property;compromised property;disproportionate costs.;
URN:	URN:SI:UM:
Type (COBISS):	Undergraduate thesis
Thesis comment:	Univ. v Mariboru, Pravna fak.
Pages:	59 f.
ID:	9170457