Vindikacijos ribojimas : teorinis aspektas

LTStraipsnyje teigiama, kad remiantis „savininko kaltės“, „mažiausio blogio“, „teisingumo“ ir kt. teorijomis tam tikrais atvejais Lietuvos privatinėje teisėje ribojama savininko vindikacijos teisė. Šios teisės ribojimai skirstomi į tiesioginius ir netiesioginius. [Iš leidinio]Reikšminiai žodžiai: Nuosavybės teisė; Savininko teisių apsauga; Vindikacija; Vindikacijos ribojimas; Law of property; Law of property limiting; Protection of owner rights; Vindication; Vindication limiting.

ENSubjective law of property establishes dependence of a concrete chose upon a certain owner; therefore, a civil legal safety mechanism of such subjective law is essential to exist. Such a mechanism is understood as an actio in rem system. Every claim in this system has its own function; that is, stands for a certain part of an owner property right. An owner has a right to vindicate his/her chose from illegal ownership. While vindicating (lot. vindicatio - to lay claim), an owner not only has to repossess the chose, but aslo can vindicate unpaid income from an illegal owner, when the chose was stolen and repossess income, which belonged to an illegal owner. A personal right to property as many other rights and kinds of freedom established in the Constitution is not absolute. Property inviolability is a constitutional principle protected by laws. Nobody can take property away on his/her will and against laws; however, on the basis of constitutional protection of property, it is important to have in mind that property inviolability principle should not be treated as an absolute. As the chose was acquired by a legal owner, laws directly limit the vindication right of the owner. This is connected to theories of „owner fault“, „thc least harm“, „justice“ and other. This explains the existancc of direct and indirect vindication limiting institutes in Lithuanian private law. [Text from author]