Understanding the property within the eu private law
Abstract
The author of the article studies the concept of “property” in the understanding of the European Court of Human Rights and the establishment of such understanding’s limits in the domestic systems of continental law. Generalization of theoretical approaches in regard to the definition of property, analysis and comparison of the results of its interpretation by national courts and the European Court of Human Rights has made it possible to conclude that the concept of property within the Art. 1 of Protocol 1 to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms largely coincides with its general understanding within the system of legal knowledge of certain countries of the Romano-Germanic law system. It covers: things, as well as property rights and obligations. While defining the application limits of this concept, it has been established that the word “ownership” used in the Art. 1 of Protocol 1 to the Convention to denote economic value as synonymous with the concept of property. Therefore, ownership is any economic benefits (assets), objects of both tangible and intangible world, which are in the state of appropriation by an individual or legal entity. Moreover, the state of appropriation can be consolidated not only by means of property rights,
but by other rights (real and obligatory, absolute and relative, etc.).
References
1. Lord MacKenzie Stuart. Legitimate Expectations and Estoppel in Community Law and English Administrative Law. Legal Issues of European Integration. 1982. V. 1. P. 55.
2. Reynolds Paul. Legitimate Expectations and the Protection of Trust in Public Officials. Public Law. Vol. 2011. P. 330–352.
3. Barack-Erez Daphne. The doctrine of legitimate expectations and the distinction between the reliance and expectation interests. European Public Law, Vol. 11 (4), 2005. URL: http://www.tau.ac.il/law/barakerez/articals/legitimate.pdf.
4. Melkonyan Davit. Concept of the Rule of Law in the Case-Law of the European Court of Human Rights. Materials of conference devoted to 80 th of the Facul-ty of Law of the Yerevan State University: Yerevan, YSU Press, 2014, pp. 339–349. URL: http://ysu.am/files/Davit_Melkonyan-1415702096-.pdf.
5. Gárdos István: A vagyontárgy és a vagyon fogalma a Ptk.-ban (GJ, 2018/11., 3-10. o.) / https://ptk2013.hu/szakcikkek/gardos-istvan-a-vagyontargy-es-a-vagyon-fogalma-a-ptk-ban-gj-201811-3-10-o/6670
6. Guide to Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. URL: https://protocol.ua/ua/posibnik_za_statteyu_1_protokolu_1_konventsii_pro_zahist_prav_lyudini_ta_osnovopolognih_svobod_1.
7. Rozhkova M.A. On the concept of «property» in the Convention «On the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms» and the practice of the European Court of Human Rights. Journal of Russian Law. 2006. No 12. С. 58–65. URL: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/k-voprosu-o-ponyatii-sobstvennost-v-konventsii-o-zaschite-prav-cheloveka-i-osnovnyh-svobod-i-praktike-evropeyskogo-suda-po-pravam-cheloveka/viewer.
8. Monica Cars-Frisk. Right to property: implementation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the European Convention on Human Rights. European Convention on Human Rights: main provisions, application practice, Ukrainian context. К.: CJSC “VIPOL”, 2004. 960 с.
9. Földi András – Hamza Gábor: A római jog története és institúciói. Nemzeti Tankönyvkiadó, Budapest 2008, 274. o.
10. Slipchenko S.O. Civil law regime of non-cash money. Law Forum. 2018. No 2. С. 133–141. DOI: http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1291560.
11. Lábady Tamás: A magánjog általános tana. Szent István Társulat, Budapest 2014, 213. o.
12. Lenkovics Barnabás: Dologi jog. Eötvös József Könyvki-adó Budapest, 2001. 50. o.
13. Slipchenko S.O. Personal non-property rights of legal entities. Bulletin of the University of Internal Affairs. 1999. No. 6. С. 49–52.
14. Nelson R. H. The Momentum Theory of Goodwill. The Accounting Review. 1953. Vol. 28, No 4. P. 491–499.
15. Spence M. Intellectual Property. Oxford, 2007. P. 225.
16. Parygina N.N., Nevzgodina E.L. Goodwill and business reputation: a comparative characteristic. Omsk University Bulletin. Series «Right». 2017. No 4 (53). С. 83–87.
17. Apanasenko E. I. Protection of rights based on licenses and permits by the European Court of Human Rights. Bulletin of F. Skorina Gomel State University. 2017. No 2 (101). С. 59–65.
18. Slipchenko S.O. The concept of legitimate expectations as a kind of property. Forum Law, 62 (3). 2020. С. 66–76. URL : http://forumprava.pp.ua/files/066-076-2020-3-FP-Slipchenko_8.pdf.