Discoussions Regarding the Controversy Generated by the Legal Interpretation of the Fiscal Registration of the Immovable Assets from the Perspective of Fulfilling the Conditions of Adverse Possession

Marian Russo ()
Additional contact information
Marian Russo: PhD student of the University of European Studies of Moldova , Assistant professor at "Petre Andrei" University of Iasi, Senior Legal adviser at "RUSSO, EDUARD IOANID & ASOCIATII", Romania

Anuarul Universitatii „Petre Andrei” din Iasi / Year-Book „Petre Andrei” University from Iasi, Fascicula: Drept, Stiinte Economice, Stiinte Politice / Fascicle: Law, Economic Sciences, Political Sciences, 2019, vol. 24, 172-181

Abstract: The emptying content of the intentional element of the possession trough the formalistic approach of the role of tax registration / declaration of the asset and its configuration at the specialized authorities of the local public administration is equivalent to an obstruction of the right to acquire the property as a result of fulfilling the term of acquisition limitation.The existence of such jurisprudential visions has a obviously illegal character, the position expressed in this regard is in contradiction both with the stipulations of the Civil Code of 1864 and the New Civil Code regarding adverse possession, and the enforcement, without legal basis, of the existence of the fiscal role or the declarative entry to the fiscal authorities, represents an addition to the law, in a manner that the court substitutes the legislator in completing the predetermined conditions in the matter.. To look formally at the institution of adverse possession and to cross the intentional subjective element of possession in the bureaucratic realm is a violation of the property rights, beyond the obvious opposition of the CEDO practice, which is crystallized in the contemporary direction of recognizing the particular importance of acquiring the right of the adverse possession, especially in those states where the cadastral records are absent or deficient. The fiscal registration of an asset cannot be appreciated as a component of the public character and under the name of owner which must be recognized for the possession exercised by the private person. Instead, it must be positioned only as a possibility of the owner to ensure the opposability of the possession in relation to third parties, especially in the absence of a normative regulation that would allow such registration.

Keywords: adverse possession; fiscal role; restricting the acquisition effect; abuse; ownership; publicity of the possession. (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: K1 K2 K4 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2019
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://lumenpublishing.com/journals/index.php/upa-sw/article/view/2652 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:lum:rev11d:v:24:y:2019:i::p:172-181

DOI: 10.18662/upalaw/38

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Anuarul Universitatii „Petre Andrei” din Iasi / Year-Book „Petre Andrei” University from Iasi, Fascicula: Drept, Stiinte Economice, Stiinte Politice / Fascicle: Law, Economic Sciences, Political Sciences from Editura Lumen, Department of Economics
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Antonio Sandu ().