当前位置: X-MOL 学术Review of Central and East European Law › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
A Comparative Perspective on the Concept of Ownership in Russian Law: From the Svod Zakonov to the 1994 Civil Code
Review of Central and East European Law ( IF 0.5 ) Pub Date : 2016-11-11 , DOI: 10.1163/15730352-04103003
Murray Raff 1 , Anna Taitslin 2
Affiliation  

The modern European unitary conception of ownership emerged from the dissolution of feudalism and achievement of a deeper understanding of Roman law to become an ideal of property law in the European Civil-Law tradition. Prior to its dissolution European feudalism represented hierarchies of legal tenure in land, such as the division of land ownership between dominus directus (direct owner) and dominus utilis (beneficial owner) and overlapping hierarchies of social class descending from monarchy and aristocracy to bonded serfdom. Support for the resolution of divided land ownership and victory for the unitary concept of ownership was found in the Roman law tradition. The dissolution of feudal hierarchies took different historical courses in the legal traditions that we now identify as the French, German, Common-Law and Russian legal systems and with great local variation even within those emergent traditions. The unitary concept of ownership is found today in the French and German Civil Codes and is for practical purposes reflected in the prevalence of the common-law tenure of freehold. In Russia the systemized digest of the laws of the Russian Empire, the Svod Zakonov of 1832, provided no civil-law notion of divided ownership or perpetual rights. In the Soviet era exclusive state ownership of land and the means of production was also viewed as unitary, which raised serious questions about how state agencies and enterprises could engage in transactions with their assets and products. Venediktov’s celebrated doctrine of the right of operative management, codified in the Civil Code of the RSFR of 1964, provided legal recognition of de facto proprietary rights for state enterprises. This introduced a form of divided ownership ‘on the ground’ despite the dogma of unitary state ownership. This reality further manifested itself in widespread division of ownership between land and buildings. The Civil Code of the Russian Federation of 1994 retained and even extended some of these solutions that relied on split or divided ownership. This might have been a pragmatic way forward in the early 1990s, however twenty years later the demands of a modern sophisticated legal system require a policy trajectory back toward a modern European unitary conception of ownership. The Russian Civil Code thus should be extended in this direction.

中文翻译:

俄罗斯法中所有权概念的比较视角:从斯沃德·扎科诺夫到 1994 年的民法典

近代欧洲统一的所有权概念源于封建制度的解体和对罗马法的更深入理解,成为欧洲民法传统中财产法的理想。在其解体之前,欧洲封建制度代表了土地法定权属的等级制度,例如土地所有权在dominus directus(直接所有者)和dominus utilis(受益所有者)之间的划分以及从君主制和贵族制到奴役制的社会阶级重叠的等级制度。在罗马法传统中发现了对解决分割土地所有权的支持和统一所有权概念的胜利。封建等级制度的瓦解在我们现在认定为法国、德国、普通法和俄罗斯法律体系,即使在这些新兴传统中也存在很大的地方差异。今天在法国和德国民法典中可以找到统一的所有权概念,并且出于实际目的反映在普通法永久业权的盛行中。在俄罗斯,俄罗斯帝国法律的系统摘要,即 1832 年的 Svod Zakonov,没有提供分割所有权或永久权利的民法概念。在苏联时代,土地和生产资料的专属国家所有权也被视为单一的,这引发了关于国家机构和企业如何与其资产和产品进行交易的严重问题。Venediktov 著名的经营管理权学说,编入了 1964 年的 RSFR 民法典,为国有企业提供了对事实上的所有权的法律承认。尽管存在单一国家所有制的教条,但它引入了一种“实地”分割所有权的形式。这一现实进一步体现在土地和建筑物之间广泛的所有权划分上。1994 年的俄罗斯联邦民法典保留甚至扩展了一些依赖分割或分割所有权的解决方案。在 1990 年代初期,这可能是一种务实的前进方式,但 20 年后,现代复杂法律体系的需求要求政策轨迹回到现代欧洲统一的所有权概念。因此,俄罗斯民法典应该朝这个方向扩展。尽管存在单一国家所有制的教条,但它引入了一种“实地”分割所有权的形式。这一现实进一步体现在土地和建筑物之间广泛的所有权划分上。1994 年的俄罗斯联邦民法典保留甚至扩展了一些依赖分割或分割所有权的解决方案。在 1990 年代初期,这可能是一种务实的前进方式,但 20 年后,现代复杂法律体系的需求要求政策轨迹回到现代欧洲统一的所有权概念。因此,俄罗斯民法典应该朝这个方向扩展。尽管存在单一国家所有制的教条,但它引入了一种“实地”分割所有权的形式。这一现实进一步体现在土地和建筑物之间广泛的所有权划分上。1994 年的俄罗斯联邦民法典保留甚至扩展了一些依赖分割或分割所有权的解决方案。在 1990 年代初期,这可能是一种务实的前进方式,但 20 年后,现代复杂法律体系的需求要求政策轨迹回到现代欧洲统一的所有权概念。因此,俄罗斯民法典应该朝这个方向扩展。1994 年的俄罗斯联邦民法典保留甚至扩展了一些依赖分割或分割所有权的解决方案。在 1990 年代初期,这可能是一种务实的前进方式,但 20 年后,现代复杂法律体系的需求要求政策轨迹回到现代欧洲统一的所有权概念。因此,俄罗斯民法典应该朝这个方向扩展。1994 年的俄罗斯联邦民法典保留甚至扩展了一些依赖分割或分割所有权的解决方案。在 1990 年代初期,这可能是一种务实的前进方式,但 20 年后,现代复杂法律体系的需求要求政策轨迹回到现代欧洲统一的所有权概念。因此,俄罗斯民法典应该朝这个方向扩展。
更新日期:2016-11-11
down
wechat
bug