The Concept of Possession in Civil Law

Possession constitutes a complicated phenomenon of civil law to understand, which leads to numerous studies of its legal nature. Possession has a long history, during which its contents have been transformed. The author analyzed the difference in the content of possession using the civil legislation of Germany, France, Italy, Switzerland, Austria and Spain as cases for the study. The ambiguity of the concept of possession leads to the situation when in the doctrine this term is used to describe phenomena that do not relate to possession as an institution of property law. Thus, scholars often use the term «possession» in relation to digital assets, tokens, etc., when researching and describing concepts related to the digitalization of civil turnover. The author substantiates the impossibility of using the terminology of property law to digital objects. The paper analyzes the significance of transfer of possession during the transfer of ownership under the contract of sale and in the event of possession arising under a works contract. The conclusion is formulated according to which possession can be associated only with physical entities and it is inherent exclusively to the legal regime of things, but not other objects of civil rights. The concept of bona fide prescription possession is formulated and a conclusion is made about its legal nature. The author highlights and argues the point of view according to which the doctrinal classification of possession, depending on the type of thing (movable or immovable), into ordinary and «bookish» for the purposes of differentiating ways of its protection is controversial. Attention is drawn to the fact that possession can act as a fact and as a right. At the same time, as a legal fact, possession must be differentiated for the purposes of protecting the interests of the authorized party.

1. Alekseev VA. O vladenii nedvizhimym imushchestvom [Possession of Real Estate]. Zakon. 2019;9. (In Russ.).

2. Vasilevskaya LYu. Vladenie i vladelcheskaya zashchita: problemy teorii i pravoprimeneniya [Possession and ownership protection: problems of theory and law enforcement]. Tsivilist. 2011;1. (In Russ.).

3. Vasilevskaya LYu. Uchenie o veshchnykh sdelkakh po germanskomu pravu [The doctrine of property transactions under German law]. Moscow: Statut Publ.; 2004. (In Russ.).

4. Vitryansky VV. Aktualnye problemy sudebnoy zashchity prava sobstvennosti na nedvizhimost [Actual problems of judicial protection of property rights to real estate]. In: Kozyr OM, Makovskiy AL (eds.). Civil Law of Modern Russia. Moscow: Statut Publ.; 2008. (In Russ.).

5. Vseobshchiy grazhdanskiy kodeks Avstrii [The Uniform Civil Code of Austria]. Moscow: Infotropik Media Publ.; 2011. (In Russ.).

6. Gadzhiev GA. Konstitutsionnye osnovy sovremennogo prava sobstvennosti [Constitutional foundations of modern property law]. In: litovkin VN, Sukhanov EA, Chubarov VV (eds.). Property Law: actual problems. IZiSP. Moscow: Statute Publ.; 2008. (In Russ.).

7. German Civil Code [Deutsches Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch mit Einführungsgesetz: introduction. The law to the Civil code]. 2nd ed. Moscow: Volters Kluver Publ.; 2006. (In Russ.).

8. The Civil Code of France (the Code of Napoleon). Moscow: Infotropik Media Publ.; 2012. (In Russ.).

9. Ermolaeva VA. Tokenizatsiya nedvizhimosti: ot demokratizatsii rynka do novykh pravovykh vyzovov [Tokenization of real estate: from market democratization to new legal challenges]. Law and Business. 2021;4. (In Russ.).

10. Efimova LG. Token kak virtualnyy obekt grazhdanskogo prava [Token as a virtual object of civil law]. Banking Law. 2020;3. (In Russ.).

11. Ershov OG. O prave zakazchika na obekt stroitelstva do gosudarstvennoy registratsii prava sobstvennosti [About the right of the customer to the construction object before the state registration of ownership]. Notarius. 2013;1. (In Russ.).

12. Rudokvas AD. Priobretatelnaya davnost i davnostnoe vladenie: avtoref. dis. … d-ra yurid. nauk [Acquisition prescription and prescription possession: Author’s Abstract]. St. Petersburg; 2011. (In Russ.).

13. Rudokvas AD. Punkt 2 statya 234 GK RF: Publitsianov isk ili vladelcheskaya zashchita? [para 2 Article 234 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation: A public claim or ownership protection?]. Vestnik of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation. 2007;11,12. (In Russ.).

14. Rybalov AO. Vladenie v rossiyskom prave: quo vadis? [Possession in the Russian Law: quo vadis?]. Civil Law Review. 2019;5. (In Russ.).

15. Sinitsyn SA. Vladenie i vladelcheskaya zashchita v grazhdanskom prave gosudarstv kontinentalnoy Evropy [Possession and Possesion Protection in the civil law of the States of continental Europe]. Moscow: Statut Publ.; 2012. (In Russ.).

16. Sinitsyn SA. Iskovaya zashchita veshchnykh prav v rossiyskom i zarubezhnom grazhdanskom prave: aktualnye problemy [Claim protection of property rights in Russian and foreign civil law: actual problems]. Moscow: Infotropik Media Publ.; 2015. (In Russ.).

17. Sklovskiy KI. Vladenie i vladelcheskaya zashchita [Possession and Possession Protection]. Law and Economics. 2000;2. (In Russ.).

18. Sklovskiy KI. Sobstvennost v grazhdanskom prave [Property in civil law]. 5th ed. Moscow: Statut Publ.; 2010. (In Russ.).

19. Sukhanov EA. K ponyatiyu veshchnogo prava [To the concept of property law]. Legal Issues of Real Estate. 2005;1. (In Russ.).

20. Churilov AYu. Pravovoe regulirovanie oborota nevzaimozamenyaemykh tokenov: problemy i perspektivy [Legal regulation of the turnover of non-fungible tokens (NFT): problems and prospects]. Economy and Law. 2022;1. (In Russ.).