The social function of possession through its interversion
A função social da posse por meio de sua interversão
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.53660/CLM-1105-23D31Resumo
Changes in social relations require overcoming paradigms. In this context, it is observed that there is a failure in legislative predictability and in the doctrinal discussion about intervention due to the thesis nemo sibi ipse causa possessionis mutare potest (no one can change the cause of possession for himself).In order to better adapt the norm to the factual situations, through an analysis of comparative law, it is intended to demonstrate the absence of discipline expressed by the Brazilian legislation and to identify the phenomenal modes of manifestation of the interversion of possession (interversion by act of a third party and intervention by own act), as well as the intervention of detention in possession, as current forms of possibility of original acquisition of property. Dealing with the theme is relevant due to the need to effectively comply with the constitutional principle of social function. The argumentative construct is made up of the deductive method of research, discussing the legislation in force, jurisprudence and doctrines.
Downloads
Referências
ARAÚJO, Fabio Caldas de. Usucapião. 3 ed., Malheiros, 2015.
BAUR, Fritz; STÜRNER, Rolf. Sachenrecht. 17 ed., München: C. H. Beck’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1999.
BIANCA, C. Massimo. Diritto Civile (La Proprietà). v. VI. Milano: Dott. A. Giuffrè, 1999.
BAUDRY-LACANTINERIE, G. & TISSIER, A. Traité Théorique et Pratique de Droit Civil – De La Prescription, Paris: Librairie de la Société du Recueil Général des Lois et des Arrêts, 1895.
CORNU, Gérard. Droit Civil. 9a ed. Paris: Montchrestien, 1999.
CORRAL, Ildefonso L. García del. Cuerpo del Derecho Civil Romano (Digesto-1ª parte). t. II. Barcelona: Jaime Molinas, 1892.
IHERING, Rudolf von. Du Fondement de la Protection Possessoire. Tradução de O. de Meulenaere. 2a ed. rev. e aum. Paris: A. Marescq, Ainé, 1875, 204 p.
IHERING, Rudolf von. Études Complémentaires de L’Esprit du Droit Romain - Du Rôle de la Volonté dans la Possession. v. III. Tradução de O. de Meulenaere. Paris: Librairie A.. Marescq, Ainé, 1891.
IHERING, Rudolf von. La Theoría de la Posesión. Tradução de Adolfo Posada. 2 ed. Madrid: Hijos de Reus, Editores, 1912.
KELLER, Friedrich Ludwig von. Der Römische Civilprocess und die Actionen. Leipzig: Bernhard Tauchnitz, 1883.
DE MARTINO. Commentario del Codice Civile. t. III. Foro Italiano, Roma, 1955.
MAZEAUD & MAZEAUD & CHABAS, François. Leçons de Droit Civil (Biens). t. II 8a ed. Paris: Montchrestien, 1994.
MENEZES CORDEIRO, António Manuel da Rocha. A Posse: Perspectivas Dogmáticas e Actuais. 3 ed. atual. Lisboa: Almedina, 2000.
MONCADA, L. Cabral de. Estudos de História do Direito. v. II. Coimbra: Universidade de Coimbra, 1949.
MONTEL, Alberto. Il Possesso de Buona Fede. v. IV.Padova: CEDAM, 1935.
MONTEL, Alberto; PROTETTÌ, Ettore. Possesso e Azioni Possessorie nella Giurisprudenza. Padova: CEDAM, 1970.
PONTES DE MIRANDA, Francisco Cavalcanti. Tratado de Direito Privado. parte especial. t. X. 4a ed. São Paulo: RT, 1983.
POTHIER, Robert-Joseph. Traités de la Possession et de la Prescription. t. II. Paris: Chez de Debure, Pere, 1772.
RUPERTO, Saverio. Enciclopedia del Diritto - Vocabulo Usucapione. t. XLV, Varese: Giuffrè, 1992.
SAVIGNY, Friederich von Carl. Das Recht des Besitzes. Reimpressão da edição de Viena (1865): Scientia Verlagen Aalen, 1990.
SCHLOSSMANN, Siegmund. Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte Abteilung, v. 24, 1903.
TROPLONG, R. Th. Le Droit Civil Expliqué Suivant L’Ordre du Code, De La Prescription. Bruxelles: Société Typographique Belge, 1841.
