Open AccessOn the question of the ratio between the condictio and the vindicatio
Author(s) -
Iryna Romanska
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
časopis kiïvsʹkogo unìversitetu prava
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
ISSN - 2219-5521
DOI - 10.36695/2219-5521.2.2020.53
Subject(s) - possession (linguistics) , obligation , law , property (philosophy) , law and economics , property law , intangible property , business , political science , property rights , sociology , philosophy , linguistics , epistemology
The scientific article is devoted to the solution of the scientific-applied problem of delimitation of the obtaining, keeping of pro -perty without sufficient legal basis with the vindicatio.The criteria for the ratio of a reclaim owner’s property from someone else’s illegal possession and a condictio claim are consi -dered. Both common and distinctive features of these legal institutions are analyzed. Vindicatio and condictio lawsuits are effectiveways to protect property rights, not measures of liability.Obligations arising from the obtaining, keeping of property without sufficient legal basis, as well as reclaim owners property fromsomeone else’s illegal possession, by their legal nature belong to the number of renewable, protective and non-contractual legal relations.The similarity can be seen in the so-called criteria as «right to follow». It is concluded that the range of persons entitled to file acondictio claim is wider than the subjects entitled to vindicatio.The main difference between condictio and vindicatio is that a claim for the return of property from someone else owns withoutsufficient legal basis is a legal remedy, and a claim for recovery of property from someone else’s illegal possession is a legal claim. Itis established that in contrast to vindicatio, the fact that the illegal purchaser actually owns the thing, in the case of condictio is not decisive.It is justified that in comparison with the vindicatio the condictio obligation has a wider range of action and is applied regardlessof the good faith of the purchaser and regardless of how the property was taken out of the possession of the creditor.Based on the generalization of theoretical research, analysis of current legislation of Ukraine, it is established that the obligationof condictio is a universal independent way to protect subjective civil law and an effective means of influencing the illegal acquirer.Condictio is applied in the alternative to vindicatio, when a certain requirement of the titular owner of the property is not covered bythe regulations of the main method of protection. The author concludes that it is impossible to compete in vindicatio and condictioclaims.