magistrsko delo
Povzetek
Zakon o kmetijskih zemljiščih in Zakon o gozdovih določata posebnosti v zvezi s predkupnimi pravicami in postopkom prodaje kmetijskih zemljišč, zaščitenih kmetij in gozdov, ki promet urejajo drugače, kot ga urejajo tradicionalni instituti civilnega prava. Predpisa določata kategorije in vrstne rede predkupnih upravičencev za nakup pa tudi prednostno pravico do zakupa kmetijskih zemljišč, zaščitenih kmetij in gozdov.
Določitev zakonite predkupne pravice pomeni poseg v razpolagalno upravičenje lastnika oziroma v pravico do izbire sopogodbenika in s tem v ustavno zagotovljeno pravico do zasebne lastnine. Pri določitvi analiziranih zakonitih predkupnih pravic gre za relativno blage omejitve, ki so utemeljene v javnem interesu, sorazmerne in zato dopustne. Ne glede na to, da zakonodajalec v primeru prodaje določenih vrst gozdov na prvo mesto postavi osebo javnega prava, pri kmetijskih zemljiščih pa je oseba javnega prava zadnji v vrsti predkupnih upravičencev, sta obe predkupni pravici določeni v javnem interesu.
Jedro problema je analiza in primerjava kategorij in vrstnih redov prednostnih upravičencev, ki pokaže, da med vrstnimi redi in kategorijami prednostnih upravičencev do prodaje in zakupa kmetijskega zemljišča in gozda obstajajo določene razlike, katerih ratio je zdaj bolj, zdaj manj jasen. Med dilemami in neustrezno urejenimi položaji, ki so ob analizi sodne prakse izpostavljeni v tej nalogi, velja izpostaviti položaj solastnika kot predkupnega upravičenca v primeru prodaje gozda. V tem primeru ga lahko po stališču teorije štejemo za mejaša. Z razlago, ki je analogna sodni praksi v primeru predkupne pravice občine, pa bi solastnika lahko šteli celo za prvega predkupnega upravičenca.
V nalogi opozarjamo tudi na nekatere nejasnosti, ki nastanejo ob smiselni uporabi predpisov o prodaji kmetijskega zemljišča za primere prodaj gozda in v primeru zakupa. Končno obravnavamo še postopkovne posebnosti uveljavljanja prednostnih pravic ter sankcije, ki nastopijo ob kršitvi analiziranih pravil, ki so v ničnosti zavezovalnega pravnega posla in oviri za overitev podpisa na zemljiškoknjižnem dovolilu.
Ključne besede
poseg v zasebno lastnino;prenos lastninske pravice;zakup;kmetijska zemljišča;gozd;predkupna pravica;kategorije prednostnih upravičencev;prednostna pravica pri zakupu;magistrska dela;
Podatki
Jezik: |
Slovenski jezik |
Leto izida: |
2018 |
Tipologija: |
2.09 - Magistrsko delo |
Organizacija: |
UM PF - Pravna fakulteta |
Založnik: |
D. Borlinič Gačnik] |
UDK: |
347.239(043.3) |
COBISS: |
5598251
|
Št. ogledov: |
1339 |
Št. prenosov: |
253 |
Ocena: |
0 (0 glasov) |
Metapodatki: |
|
Ostali podatki
Sekundarni jezik: |
Angleški jezik |
Sekundarni naslov: |
A comparison of preferential rights regarding the disposition of agricultural areas and forests with an analysis of Slovenian case law |
Sekundarni povzetek: |
Agricultural Land Act and Act on Forests regulates the specificities regarding the transactions of agricultural land and pre-emptive rights. Legislation defines the pre-emptive rights to buy and priority rights to lease agricultural areas, protected farms and forests, by determining the categories and ranks of priority rights holders.
Pre-emptive rights and priority rights to lease agricultural land and forests disables the owner to choose the counter party and therefore interfere with the constitutional guaranteed right to private property. The interference is justified in the public interest. Pre-emptive rights are recognised as relatively minor restrictions, which are proportionate with its object and therefore admissible. Analysed pre-emptive rights are determined in the public interest, regardless the fact that in the case of agricultural land, the public entity is recognised as the last pre-emptive holder.
The aim of this paper is to analyse and compare the categories and ranks of holders of pre-emptive rights and priority rights to lease agricultural land and forests. There are certain divergences between the ranks and the categories of pre-emptive holders of agricultural land and forest. The divergences are not consistently justified, e.g. the position of the co-proprietor of forests, which is treated differently compared to the position of the co-proprietor of agricultural land without legitimate or reasonable justification. Therefore, the theory stated that co-proprietor could be considered as the first neighbour. Moreover, the co-proprietor could be considered as first pre-emptive buyer, according to the case law in the case of conflict between municipality as pre-emptive buyer and co-proprietor as pre-emptive buyer according to the general rules.
There are some ambiguities pointed out in this paper that are associated with mutatis mutandis use of the rules, governing the transactions of agricultural land to the transactions of forests. Finally, we address the procedural questions and sanctions that should be applied in violation of the analysed rules. In addition to administrative protection, in particular, the nullity of the contract and the obstacle to the notarisation of the signature on the clausula intabulandi. |
Sekundarne ključne besede: |
real estate transaction;lease;agricultural land;forest;pre-emptive right;priority right to lease;categories of priority right holders;the right to private property; |
URN: |
URN:SI:UM: |
Vrsta dela (COBISS): |
Magistrsko delo/naloga |
Komentar na gradivo: |
Univ. v Mariboru, Pravna fak. |
Strani: |
VII, 82 str. |
ID: |
10938782 |