|Article title||On the Doctrinal Principles of Property Restitution|
PhD in Law, assistant professor, of Civil Law Department Yaroslav Mudryi National Law University (Kharkiv, Ukraine) email@example.com
|Name of magazine||Legal journal «Law of Ukraine» (Ukrainian version)|
Restitution in the Ukrainian reality is connected with the consequences of recognizing the transaction invalid. Meanwhile, due to its more general understanding as a legal mechanism designed to return property to its owner, it must be perceived in this way.This property emphasizes the property vector of its movement in the legal field: restitutio (Latin) has the root word “rest” (“thing”), and the ending (“tutio”) indicates the dynamics of the process, which means the return and restoration of the right to a thing.
At the same time, such a perspective on the study of restitution in the civil law of Ukraine is practically absent, although it should have been updated a long time ago. In the post-monarchical post-revolutionary Soviet space, owners have been totally deprived of property since 1917. Some owners were forced to leave it, fleeing the Soviet republic. Legal arbitrariness with the adoption of dubious and unacceptable from the point of view of law laws was widespread. In modern conditions, although this process has been assessed, so far the process of returning property to persons unjustly deprived of the right to it has not been launched in Ukraine. Therefore, there was no adequate legal mechanism in our state.
However, as Ukraine is trying to enter the European legal space, where restitution processes have already been completed, it is time to consider the principles of this process in our country as well. This is the relevance of the study. There are critically few scientific publications on this topic – some investigations were made by I. Spasibo-Fateeva, O. Avramova, N. Blazhivska, N. Moskalyuk. However, this topic is so important that, of course, such publications are clearly not enough.
The purpose of this article is to establish the reasons and necessity for restitution and its basic beginnings.
|Keywords||return of property; restitution; unlawful deprivation of property; justice|
1. Kot S, Povernennia i restytutsiia kulturnykh tsinnostei u politychnomu ta kulturnomu zhytti Ukrainy (ХХ – poch. ХХІ st.) (Instytut istorii Ukrainy NAN Ukrainy 2020) (in Ukrainian).
2. Spasibo-Fateeva I (red), Har’kovskaja civilisticheskaja shkola: zashhita sub’ektivnyh grazhdanskih prav i interesov (Pravo 2014) (in Russian).
3. Spasybo-Fatieieva I (red), Nediisnist pravochyniv: komentar sudovoi praktyky (Pravo 2018) (in Ukrainian).
4. Us M, ‘Zakhyst prava vlasnosti’ v Spasybo-Fatieieva I (red), Pravovi pozytsii Verkhovnoho Sudu: komentari naukovtsiv (EKUS 2020) (in Ukrainian).
5. Avramova O, ‘Chy mozhlyva restytutsiia natsionalizovanoi vlasnosti v Ukraini?’  1 (103) Mala entsyklopediia notariusa (in Ukrainian).
6. Blazhivska N, ‘Osoblyvosti zastosuvannia kompensatsii ta restytutsii Yevropeiskym sudom z prav liudyny z metoiu zakhystu prava vlasnosti’ (2017) Chasopys Kyivskoho universytetu prava 267–71 (in Ukrainian).
7. Krat V, ‘Nediisnist dohovoru: zakonodavche rehuliuvannia ta vydy’ (2017) 138 Problemy zakonnosti 8–16 (in Ukrainian).
8. Miroshnychenko A, Popov, Ripenko A, ‘Zemelni dilianky: vindykatsiia, restytutsiia, kondyktsiia, vyznannia prav (spivvidnoshennia ta deiaki problemni pytannia)’  3 (16) Chasopys Akademii advokatury Ukrainy (in Ukrainian).
9. Moskaliuk N, ‘Restytutsiia v systemi prypynennia derzhavnoi vlasnosti: zakonodavchi nedoliky ta pravozastosovni problemy’ (2020) 43 Naukovyi visnyk Mizhnarodnoho humanitarnoho universytetu. Ser.: Yurysprudentsiia 106–11 (in Ukrainian).
10. Romaniuk Ya, ‘Restytutsiia, vindykatsiia, kondyktsiia, vidshkoduvannia shkody: okremi aspekty spivvidnoshennia ta rozmezhuvannia’ (2014) 10 Visnyk Verkhovnoho Sudu Ukrainy 22-31 (in Ukrainian).
11. Spasybo-Fatieieva I, ‘Naslidky nediisnosti pravochyniv’ (2008) 4 Visnyk hospodarskoho sudochynstva 79–87 (in Ukrainian).
12. Spasybo-Fatieieva I, ‘Spirni pytannia nediisnosti pravochyniv ta yii naslidkiv’ (2007) 3 Visnyk APNU 95–106 (in Ukrainian).
13. Spasybo-Fatieieva Inna, ‘Restytutsiia vlasnosti’ (2015) 11 Pravo Ukrainy 89–98 (in Ukrainian).
14. Dudenko T, ‘Tsyvilno-pravova okhorona prav na kulturni tsinnosti ta yikh oborotozdatnist’ (dys kand yuryd nauk, 2017) (in Ukrainian).
15. Krat V, ‘Pravovi naslidky nediisnosti pravochynu: okremi aspekty’ v Yurydychna osin 2013 roku: zb. tez dop. ta nauk. povidoml. uchasn. vseukr. nauk.-prakt. konf. molodykh uchenykh ta zdobuvachiv (A Hetman red, Pravo 2013) 19–22 (in Ukrainian).
16. Spasybo-Fatieieva Inna, ‘Okremi pytannia zastosuvannia restytutsii’ v Aktualni problemy pryvatnoho prava: materialy mizhnar. nauk.-prakt. konf., prysviach. 92-i richnytsi z dnia narodzh. d-ra yuryd. nauk, prof., chl.-kor. AN URSR V. P. Maslova (Kharkiv 2014) 34–7 (in Ukrainian).