POSSESSION, COMPARATIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS (SERBIA, CROATIA, MACEDONIA, MONTENEGRO, BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA)

Posest ni pravica, je dejanska oblast nad stvarjo. Že v rimskem pravu so poznali pojem posesti, ki so ga definirali po subjektivni koncepciji posesti. Tako je za pridobitev posesti bilo potrebno izpolniti dva pogoja, in sicer imeti dejansko oblast nad stvarjo in voljo posedovati stvar kot svojo. Srbija, Črna Gora, Hrvaška, Makedonija ter Bosna in Hercegovina so nekoč bile del SFRJ in takrat je bila enotna stvarnopravno ureditev z zveznim zakonom (ZTLR), ki je veljal v vseh državah članicah bivše SFRJ. Po osamosvojitvi so države sprejele nove zakone, s katerim so uredile stvarnopravna razmerja. Srbija je izdelala predlog zakonika, vendar pa je v uporabi še vedno ZTLR. Primerjalno-pravna analiza omenjenih držav kaže, da imajo podobno ureditev posesti. Po objektivni koncepciji posesti, ki so jo sprejele vse obravnavane ureditve, je posest definirana kot dejanska oblast nad stvarjo. Mogoča pa je tudi posest pravice, in sicer posest stvarne služnosti. Države se med seboj najbolj razlikujejo pri priposestvovanju in varstvu posesti. Na preostalih področjih posesti, kot na primer vrste posesti, pridobitev in izguba, dedovanje posesti, so si ureditve držav podobne, z izjemo predloga zakonika Srbije, kateri se od vseh držav najbolj razlikuje.Possession is not a right, it is the actual authority over an object. Already Roman law knew the concept of possession, which is defined by subjective concept of possession. Though, to obtain the possession it was necessary to fulfill two conditions, to have the actual authority over an object and will to possess it as your own. Serbia, Montenegro, Croatia, Macedonia and Bosnia and Herzegovina were once part of Yugoslavia and back then has existed uniform property law\u27s regulation by federal law (ZTLR), which was valid in all member states of the former Yugoslavia. After independence, member states adopted new laws, by which they established property law\u27s relations. Serbia has made a code proposal, but for now ZTLR is still in use. A comparative-legal analysis of these countries shows they have a similar arrangement of possession. After objective conception of possession, which all the regulations have adopted, it’s defined as the actual control of an object. It is also possible to take possession of the right, namely the possession of objective servitude. The member states, among themselves, differ most in prescription and protection of possession. In the remaining areas of the possession, as an example types of possession, acquisition and loss, inheriting the possessions, the member states have similar arrangements, with the exception of the code proposal of Serbia, which the most differs from other member states