Prescription of easements in the public interest

V Zakonu o urejanju prostora so predvidene tri oblike omejitve lastninske pravice na nepremični v javno korist, med drugim začasna ali trajna služnost v javno korist. Vsaka omejitev lastninske pravice je dopustna le pod pogoji določenimi v zakonu, in sicer v primeru zagotavljanja javne koristi ter pravici do nadomestila ali odškodnine lastnika s služnostjo obremenjene nepremičnine. Zakonsko določeni pogoji omogočajo ustavnopravno zagotovljeno varstvo zasebne lastnine določeno v 69. členu Ustave RS. Služnost v javno korist je uvedel Zakon o urejanju prostora, čeprav se je že desetletja pred sprejemom tega zakona predvidevala uporaba služnosti kot podlaga za gradnjo infrastrukturnih omrežij. Služnost v javno korist predstavlja posebno obliko služnosti, saj jo opredeljujeta dve specifični značilnosti: namen ustanovitve predstavlja uresničevanje javne koristi ter ustanovitev je nujno potrebna za gradnjo omrežij in objektov gospodarske javne infrastrukture ali njihovo nemoteno delovanje. S priposestvovanjem pridobljena služnost v javno korist je časovno neomejena pravica, saj je potrebna dokler se uporablja oziroma obratuje javna infrastruktura zaradi katere je bila služnost ustanovljena. Služnost v javno korist je samostojno sicer neprenosljiva pravica, vendar pa se ob zamenjavi operaterja javne infrastrukture prenese na novega operaterja, saj ni pomembna oseba služnostnega upravičenca, temveč funkcija ki jo ta opravlja. Ali lahko služnost v javno korist nastane s priposestvovanjem je vprašanje, glede katerega se v pravni teoriji in sodni praksi pojavljajo različna stališča. Prevladujoče in bolj prepričljivo je stališče, da sta lahko pravna temelja za ustanovitev služnosti le pravni posel in oblikovalna sodna odločba. Pridobitev služnosti v javno korist na temelju nepravega priposestvovanja namreč predstavlja neodplačen poseg v lastninsko pravico. Tak poseg pa ni skladen s pravili in načeli prisilne pridobitve služnosti, ki mora biti glede na ustavne določbe odplačen. Problematika pridobitve služnosti v javno korist na temelju priposestvovanja še ni dobila končnega epiloga, saj je Vrhovno sodišče RS ponovno izreklo, da ne pritrjuje stališču, da ustavna določba o razlastitvi ali specialne določbe o ustanovitvi služnosti v javno korist v celoti izključujejo uporabo splošnih pravil civilnega prava o priposestvovanju.The Spatial Management Act provides three forms of limitation of property rights in public interest, one of which is also temporary or permanent easement in public interest. Any limitation of property rights shall be admissible only under the conditions laid down in the law, in the case to provide public interest and existence of the owners right to receive compensation of the laden property. Legally defined conditions allow the constitutional guaranteed protection of private property defined in Article 69 of the Constitution of the Republic of Slovenia. An easement to the public benefit has introduced the law on regulating space, although the use of servitude as a basis for the construction of infrastructure networks has been foreseen for decades before the adoption of this Act. An easement to the public benefit is a specific form of easement, since it defines two specific features: the purpose of the establishment is to make public benefits and the creation is essential for the construction of networks and buildings of economic public Infrastructure or their smooth operation. With praesription obtained easement in the public interest is an indefinite right, since it is required as long as the public infrastructure is used for which easement was established. An easement to the public benefit is an independent otherwise non-transferable right, however, when a public infrastructure operator is replaced, it is transferred to a new operator. In this case, it only counts the function of easement beneficiary. Can an easement in the public interest arise with praesription is a question in which different views appear in legal theory and case law. It is dominant and more convincing that the legal basis for the creation of easement can only be a legal transaction and a court judgement. The acquisition of servitude in the public interest on the basis of the praescription constitutes a repayment of interference with the right to property. This procedure does not comply with the rules and principles of compulsory acquisition of easement, which must be repaid in the light of constitutional provisions. The problem of obtaining easement in the public interest on the basis of praescription has not yet been given the final epilogue, since the Supreme Court of the Republic of Slovenia reiterated that it does not agree to that the constitutional provision on equivalent expropriation or the special provisions establishing servitude in the public interest fully excludes the application of the general rules of civil law on praesription easement in the public interest