|
|
Поставени са и въпросите: приложима ли е презумпцията на чл. 69 ЗС към отношения между съсобственици, а оттам - дали съсобственикът, който се позовава на придобивна давност за чуждата идеална част, трябва да доказва при спор за собственост, че е извършил действия, с които е обективирал спрямо съсобствениците намерението да владее техните идеални части за себе си, или намерението му за своене се предполага на основание чл. 69 ЗС, респ.
|
|
|
Also addressed are the questions: Is the presumption of Art. 69 of the OA applicable to relationships between co-owners, and hence – in case of a property dispute does a co-owner who claims acquisitive prescription have to prove that he has performed acts by which he has objectified to his co-owners his intent to possess their common parts for himself, or is this intent assumed pursuant to Art. 69 of the OA, respectively is it enough for him to prove that he has exercised de facto power over the entire property for the period pursuant to Art. 79, para. 1 of the OA. These and other matters concerning the ownership and use of common property, as well as the compensation in the case of co-ownership under Art. 31, para. 2 of the OA, which are not completelyclarifiedin the doctrine or consistently settled in the court practice, are subject of this paper.
|
