In life, such events occur when a thing or property does not belong to one person. There are several owners of private property. It is in this case that the right to common property appears. It is acquired for various reasons - inheritance, marriage status and privatization, in addition, in joint activities to build a house or joint acquisition of any thing.
The subject of common property is a thing of an individually defined property or a combination of such things. In addition, the organization as a whole as a property complex, which serves to carry out economic activities, can be the object of the type of property under consideration. The common ownership right is characterized by a plurality of entities that need special regulation through regulatory standards. This is necessary so that the expression of will of the subjects of common property is consistent. Interlocking relationships with third parties and co-owners also have a place to be in common ownership.
Forms of common ownership rights are enshrined in the legislation of our country. Thus, there are two categories of powers of common ownership. They are referred to as types of common property rights - shared and joint. A share in the right of the type of property in question is characterized by the presence of the entity to which it belongs. In common ownership of general purpose, the shares of its subjects are not fixed, they are allocated only when the property is divided or a certain thing of a particular person is allocated from it.
Based on this, it is often possible to meet such a definition of the type of property under consideration as non-share. There is no doubt that when dividing property, each of the participants has a share in the common ownership right. It is more difficult to determine the eligibility for this share. The law stipulates that the owner of the property owns a share of all property. This approach to the disclosure of the essence of the competence of the subject of shared ownership of general purpose has its advantages. Firstly, it is said that the competence of each owner is not limited to the fixed part of the common property, but has an effect on the whole thing. Secondly, there is a direct indication that the thing is the object of competence. Thirdly, since the powers of other owners also extend to the property as a whole, the question that the property is multi-subject does not arise.
But attempts to disclose the essence of competence, which belongs to the participant of the type of property under consideration through an ideal or real share, are less successful. The real share is a physically isolated part of the property that belongs to one of the co-owners. This design leads to the replacement of multisubjective property on a single-subject. And the essence of common ownership is that several entities acquire the authority to own the same object of the material world.
The form of the ideal share, which translates the right to a share in the property to the expression of value, is also completely unsuitable. It leads to the abolition of things as an object of common property, and, as a consequence, the change of the type of law under consideration by an obligation. These constructions do not reveal the concept of the right to common property and lead to the liquidation of common property as a separate legal institution. General purpose shared property arises on the grounds that are defined by law or contractual relationships. Note that the list of grounds specified in the law is not exhaustive. In addition, by agreement of the participants of the considered type of property, in the absence of consent, by the decision of the judicial authority on common property, the procedure for shared ownership can be determined.
Thus, it turns out that there can be a transfer of property from the concept of general joint to an order of shared ownership of general purpose. This is a summary of such a concept in legal science as the common property right .