Home

Glosa do uchwały SN z 5 II 2010 r., III CZP 127/09

Repository of Nicolaus Copernicus University

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Krupa-Lipińska, Katarzyna
dc.date.accessioned 2014-01-09T18:47:15Z
dc.date.available 2014-01-09T18:47:15Z
dc.date.issued 2011-06-01
dc.identifier.citation Studia Iuridica Toruniensia, Vol. 8, pp. 223-232
dc.identifier.issn 1689-5258
dc.identifier.other doi:10.12775/SIT.2011.010
dc.identifier.uri http://repozytorium.umk.pl/handle/item/1327
dc.description.abstract This critical gloss on the Supreme Court judgment considers an eff ectiveness of a power of attorney issued by, so called, large housing community (dużą wspolnotę mieszkaniową) to its board. In the given judgment the Supreme Court ruled that on the basis of art. 21.3. of the Ownership of Premises Act (ustawa o własności lokali z 24.06.1994r. Dz.U. z 2000 r. Nr 80, poz. 903, ze zm.) housing community cannot issue a power of attorney to its board for establishment of an easement of passage. Author disagrees with that and proposes functional interpretation of articles 21.3. and 22.2 of the Act. It is claimed that among actions exceeding ordinary management distinction should be made between those that just administer the co-owned estate and those which aff ects property rights of members of the community (like in case of establishment of an easement of passage). In the second group, a power of attorney granted on the basis of art. 22.2. to the members of the board enables them to make statements that aff ect rights of all members of the housing community, regardless of the fact that this eff ect is explicitly mentioned in art. 21.3. only for three kinds of actions. The reasoning is fi rstly, that granting power of attorney in this kind of action is obligatory on the basis of art. 22.2 of the Act and secondly, that voting procedure does not demand unanimity but only a majority consent. Therefore, an obligatory power of attorney granted on the basis of art. 22.2. of the Act aff ects property rights of all members of the housing community, despite of the fact that not all of them might have agreed on that. Other interpretation would made given power of attorney in other cases than those literary expressed in art. 21.3. of no practical meaning, like for example, in case of establishment of an easement of passage, which was the factual background in the commented case.
dc.language.iso pol
dc.rights Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 Poland
dc.rights info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.rights.uri http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/pl/
dc.subject housing community
dc.subject management of a co-owned real estate
dc.subject actions exceeding ordinary management
dc.subject power of attorney
dc.subject easement of passage
dc.title Glosa do uchwały SN z 5 II 2010 r., III CZP 127/09
dc.type info:eu-repo/semantics/article


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 Poland Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 Poland

Search repository



Advanced Search

Browse

My Account

Statistics

Informations