| | SLO | ENG | Cookies and privacy

Bigger font | Smaller font
First page > Show document

Show document Help

Title:PROBLEMATIKA NEPROFITNIH NAJEMNIN V DENACIONALIZIRANIH STANOVANJIH
Authors:ID Kurtiš, Alen (Author)
ID Samec Berghaus, Nataša (Mentor) More about this mentor... New window
Files:.pdf MAG_Kurtis_Alen_2017.pdf (1,20 MB)
MD5: 235DE3C4A8CC4894C1F6716CFC3D68BE
 
Language:Slovenian
Work type:Master's thesis/paper
Typology:2.09 - Master's Thesis
Organization:PF - Faculty of Law
Abstract:Avtor se v magistrskem delu ukvarja s problematiko neprofitnih najemnin v denacionaliziranih stanovanjih. Gre za področje Stanovanjskega prava, ki je neadekvatno urejeno že vse od osamosvojitve Republike Slovenije (v nadaljevanju RS). Stanovanjska pravica je bila pravica do družbenega stanovanja , ki je državljanom zagotavljala stalno uporabo stanovanja za njihove osebne potrebe in potrebe njegove družine. Imetniki stanovanjske pravice so v stanovanjih lahko bivali nedoločen čas in za neprofitno najemnino. S prehodom iz socialističnega v demokratični režim je svojo reformo doživela tudi Stanovanjska zakonodaja, v kateri se je uveljavila ustavno zavarovana pravica do zasebne lastnine. Posledično je prišlo do ukinitve stanovanjske pravice. Položaj bivših imetnikov stanovanjske pravice se je rezultiral v zakonsko določeni obveznosti prvotnih lastnikov, skleniti najemno razmerje z bivšim imetnikom stanovanjske pravice za nedoločen čas in neprofitno najemnino. Bivši imetniki so pridobili upravičenje do neprofitnega stanovanja po samem zakonu (ex lege), ne da bi se preverjalo njihovo gmotno stanje in upravičenost do neprofitne najemnine. Do nje so bili najemniki upravičeni kot bivši imetniki stanovanjske pravice. S tovrstno ureditvijo Stanovanjskega zakona je Vlada RS posegla v upravičenja tako prvotnih lastnikov kot bivših imetnikov stanovanjske pravice. Bivši imetniki stanovanjske pravice, ki so v prejšnjem režimu, ki je temeljil na družbeni lastnini, mislili, da so stanovanja v katerih bivajo praktično njihova, so bili ob prehodu na demokratičen režim, ki jih je postavil v položaj najemnikov, močno oškodovani, saj njihov položaj najemnikov ni bil primerljiv s položajem imetnikov stanovanjske pravice. Pravico so iskali tako v domačem kot mednarodnem pravnem redu. Med drugim tudi na Evropskem sodišču za človekove pravice (v nadaljevanju ESČP). ESČP je na podlagi navedb obeh strank, tako pritožnikov kot vlade RS odločilo, da bivšim imetnikom stanovanjske pravice niso bile kršene pravice in da je bil poseg v njihove pravice sorazmeren s posegom v pravice prvotnih lastnikov, ki sta ga obe skupini morali trpeti kot neizogibne posledice odločitve zakonodajalca, da omogoči, da se po drugi svetovni vojni nacionalizirana stanovanja vrnejo v naravi. Prvotnim lastnikom je bilo potrebno povrniti vsa upravičenja, ki so mu bila odvzeta, to pa je terjalo omejitev pravic bivšim imetnikom stanovanjske pravice, ki so v teh stanovanjih bivali. Spremembe so se prav tako dogajale na domačem pravnem parketu, kjer je svojo vlogo odigralo Ustavno sodišče (v nadaljevanju USRS), ki je s svojo sodno prakso omejilo prenosljivost najemnega razmerja po neprofitnih pogojih. Prvotno se je stanovanjsko razmerje po smrti imetnika stanovanjske pravice preneslo na zakonca, zunajzakonskega partnerja ali ožjega družinskega člana. USRS je prenosljivost najemnega razmerja po neprofitnih pogojih omejilo zgolj na zakonca ali zunajzakonskega partnerja, z razlago, da je ključna razlika med položaji zakonca oz. zunajzakonskega partnerja in ožjimi družinskimi člani v kvaliteti in namenu skupnosti. Namen zakonske skupnosti je trajno skupno bivanje, tega elementa pa ni mogoče pripisati drugim sorodstvenim vezem. Želja in namen skupnega trajnega bivanja je praviloma le med zakonci, ne pa tudi med drugimi ožjimi družinskimi člani. Avtor v zadnjem delu raziskovalne naloge obravnava Resolucijo o nacionalnem stanovanjskem programu 2015-2025, ki v svoji agendi prihodnosti predlaga, da se omilitev položaja prvotnih lastnikov, ki so denacionalizacijski upravičenci, zagotovi z denarno izravnavo (doplačilom najemnine) v razliki med neprofitno in primerno tržno najemnino. Takšen način ureditve bi RS obvaroval pred morebitnimi posegi v upravičenja bivših imetnikov stanovanjske pravice ali prvotnih lastnikov, hkrati pa bi tovrstna rešitev predstavljala znatno manjšo obremenitev za proračun RS, kot če bi država najemnikom zagotovila druga primerna stanovanja.
Keywords:Stanovanjska pravica, imetnik stanovanjske pravice, bivši imetniki stanovanjske pravice, prvotni lastniki, denacionalizacijski upravičenci, kršitev človekovih pravic, prenosljivost stanovanjske pravice, ukinitev stanovanjske pravice, Resolucijo o nacionalnem stanovanjskem programu 2015-2025.
Place of publishing:Maribor
Publisher:[A. Kurtiš]
Year of publishing:2017
PID:20.500.12556/DKUM-64679 New window
UDC:349.444(043.3)
COBISS.SI-ID:5414443 New window
NUK URN:URN:SI:UM:DK:NG5CYWDG
Publication date in DKUM:29.05.2017
Views:1985
Downloads:299
Metadata:XML DC-XML DC-RDF
Categories:PF
:
Copy citation
  
Average score:(0 votes)
Your score:Voting is allowed only for logged in users.
Share:Bookmark and Share



Hover the mouse pointer over a document title to show the abstract or click on the title to get all document metadata.

Secondary language

Language:English
Title:ISSUES OF NON-PROFIT RENTS IN DENATIONALIZED APARTMENTS
Abstract:The author of this research work, deals with the issue of non-profit rents in denationalized flats. This legal field of housing law is inadequately regulated since the independence of the Republic of Slovenia. Right to housing, was the social right, which provide citizens with permanent use of an apartment for their personal needs and those of his family. Holders of housing right were allowed to stay in those apartments indefinitely and for the non-profit rent. With the transition from a socialist to a democratic regime its reform also experienced Housing law, which is constitutionally protected right to private property. Consequently, there has been an abolition of housing rights. The position of former right holders has resulted in the statutory obligations of the original owners, to enter into the lease with the former holders of tenancy right for an indefinite period and the non-profit rent. Former holders have acquired entitlement to non-profit housing by operation of law (ex lege), not to assess their financial status and eligibility for non-profit rent. The tenants were entitled to it, as former tenancy right holders. With this kind of arrangement of the Housing Act, the Government intervened in the entitlement as the original owners and former tenancy right holders. Former holders of housing rights in the former regime, which was based on social ownership mean that apartments in which they live are their own property. Their position was during the transition to a democratic manner housing occupied, because tenants were not comparable to the situation they had like tenancy right holders. They had seek justice in domestic and international law, including the European Court of Human Rights. The ECHR had, based on the statements of both parties, both the complainants and the Government of the Republic of Slovenia, ruled that former holders of occupancy rights have not been infringed and that the interference with their rights was proportionate to the interference with the rights of the original owners, which both groups have to suffer as the inevitable consequences the decision of the legislature to allow that, after the second world war nationalized dwellings returned in kind. The original owner was required to reimburse all the powers he had, that demanded restrictions on the rights of former holders of housing rights that were staying in these flats. Changes have also occurred in the domestic legal area, where its role played Constitutional Court, which, with its case-law limited the transferability of tenancy for nonprofit conditions. Originally the tenancy status after the death of the holder of housing rights transferred to the spouse, cohabiting partner or close family member. Constitutional Court has the portability of tenancy conditions by non-profit limited only to the spouse or cohabiting partner, explaining that the key difference between the situation of the spouse or cohabiting partner and close family members, is in the quality and purpose of the community. The purpose of the marriage is permanent cohabitation and this element can not be attributed to other family ties. The desire and the purposes of the permanent residence is generally only between spouses, but not to other close family members. The author of this research work deals, in the last part of the research project, with the Resolution on the National Housing Programme 2015-2025, which in its agenda for the future propose to alleviate the situation of the original owners who are denationalized beneficiaries with a cash balance (extra charge rents) in the difference between the nonprofit and appropriate market rent. Such manner of arranging would protect Slovenian Government against possible interventions in the entitlements of former tenancy right holders or the original owners, while such solutions represent a significant reduction of the burden on the state budget, as if the state would provide other adequate housing to tenants.
Keywords:housing rights, holder of tenancy rights, former tenancy right holders, original owners, denationalized beneficiaries, human rights violations, portability of housing rights, abolition of housing rights, Resolution on the National Housing Programme 2015-2025.


Comments

Leave comment

You must log in to leave a comment.

Comments (0)
0 - 0 / 0
 
There are no comments!

Back
Logos of partners University of Maribor University of Ljubljana University of Primorska University of Nova Gorica