The land are for society irreplaceable and limited estate. For this reason legal order requires planty of requests for their conveyancing, which consist two phases. In the first phase is concluded the assignment of real estate contract, for which are required tightened formal and contentual elements. Second phase take place in Land Register, alternatively in Regional Court and consist in the record of property rights in the Land Register. During the process of transfer of title to land collide the law of obligations with propriety rights, just as private with public law, which produce plenty of specific charactersitics for this process.

In the Czech Republic, the same way as it is in other democratic countries, the ownership right is recognized to be one of the fundamental human rights, and it is protected by legislation of a supreme legal force. Along with modern society development and for this reason it becomes more and more restricted. It is a long time ago, when the unlimited legal domain like theory of ownership rights in rem was forsaken. The restrictions are more numerous and intensive in case of land being subject to ownership rights. This results from many differences between land and other subjects of ownership. Limited and definitive land area, the fact that land is not relocatable as well as soil, being one of environmental elements, represent the most important ones. In one line with increasing amount of people on Earth and their increasing requirements on its usage, the land must fill constantly increasing needs for the welfare of increasing amount of people at the same time. The necessity of protection of environmental aspect of land and soil respectively, is still growing. For all those reasons, the restrictions and regulations on land ownership rights are to be put in place. When justified by public interest, the restrictions arise from public law legislation. Key words: land ownership, restriction, public interest

In the northern parts of Sweden forestry and Sami reindeer herding are exercised on the same land and there is an ongoing land use dispute between the land users. Land ownership and reindeer herding rights, based on immemorial prescription and customary law, are parallel property rights to the same land. Studies have concluded that the legal framework does not sufficiently reflect the property rights perspective of the land use conflict. This study examines the legal framework that regulates the relationship between forestry and reindeer herding from a property rights perspective. Starting points of the study are basic aspects of property rights, such as the right to use, decide on and benefit economically from property and the legal protection required in relation to others. Comparisons are made with the legal frameworks that regulate other relationships within real estate law, including e.g. neighbors, easements, joint facilities and utility easement. The study concludes that the relationship between land ownership and reindeer herding rights can be understood only against the background of historical events such as colonization and demarcation. The rights are more independent of each other than other legal relations and can be compared to a double ownership. It is further concluded that the Forestry Act is based on the assumption that reindeer herding is primarily a public interest that needs protection. Land owners have a far-reaching right to use forests that causes damages to reindeer pasture lands that is not in accordance with the legal nature of the reindeer herding right. Further, central elements usually used to regulate property rights relations are missing, e.g. mutual consideration, damages and judicial review. The study also examines if the legal framework is in accordance with the constitutional protection of property in Chapter 2 Section 15 of the constitutional Instrument of Government and Article 1 of the First Protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights. It is concluded that the legal framework has several deficiencies in this respect. Elements are discussed that can be implemented in law to appropriately reflect the property rights studied. / Nuorta osiin Ruoŧas meahccedoallu ja sámi boazodoallu doaimmahuvvojit seamma eatnamiin ja leat eananriiddut eanangeavaheddjiid gaskkas. Eananoamasteapmi ja boazodoallorievttit, vuođđuduvvon dološ vieruiduvvon rievtti ja doloža rájes geavaheami vuođul, leaba bálddalaš opmodatrievttit seamma eatnamiidda. Guorahallamat leat čuoččuhan ahte juridihkalaš rámmahuksehus ii doarvái govvit opmodatrievtti geahčastaga eanangeavahanriiddus. Dát guorahallan iská juridihkalaš rámmahuksehusa mii mudde gaskavuođa meahccedoalu ja boazoealáhusa gaskkas opmodatriektelaš geahčastagas. Vuolggasadji guorahallamis lea vuđolaš aspeavttat opmodatrievttis, dego riekti geavahit, mearridit ja ávkkástallat ekonomalaččat opmodagas ja dat lágalaš suodji mii gáibiduvvon iežáid gaskavuođaide. Buohtastahttimat leat dahkkon juridihkalaš rámmahuksehusain mii mudde iežá gaskavuođaid opmodatlágas, ránnjá gullojit maid dása, servituhtat, ásahusat ja jođasriekti. Guorahallan gávnnaha ahte gaskavuohta eananopmodaga ja boazodoallorievtti gaskkal dušše sáhttá ipmirduvvot dan duogážiin historjjálaš dáhpáhusaiguin dego koloniseren ja ráddjen. Dát vuoigatvuođat leat eanet sorjavaččat guhte guoimmis go iežá juridihkalaš gaskavuođat ja sáhttá buohtastahttot guovtte gearddi oamastemiin. Leat vel lassin gávnnahuvvon ahte Meahccedikšoláhka lea vuođđuduvvon dáinna oainnuin ahte boazodoallu lea almmolaš beroštupmi ja dárbbaha suoji. Eananoamasteddjiin lea stuorra muddui riekti geavahit meahci nu ahte dagaha vahága boazodoalu guohtuneatnamiidda ja ii čuovu boazodoallorievtti lága vuoiŋŋa. Dasa lassin, váilot guovddáš oasit mat dábálaččat muddejit opmodatgaskavuođaid, omd. gáibádusat oktasaš vuhtii váldimis, billisteamit ja riektelaš geahččaleapmi. Guorahallan iská maid jus lágalaš rámma čuvvo dan konstitušuvnnalaš suoji opmodagas 2 kap 5 oassi ruoŧa vuođđolágas ja 1 artihkal vuosttaš beavdegirjjis Eurohpákonvenšuvnnas eamiálbmotrivttiide. Lea gávnnahuvvon ahte juridihkalaš rámmain leat máŋga váilevašvuođat dán eavttus ja oasit lágas mat sáhttet rievdaduvvot vai buoret govvidit ja suddjejit iskojuvvon opmodatrivttiid.

Abstract The aim of this work was to determine the extent of land ownership by companies in Northern Finland over the period 1885-1939, what companies acquired land, what prices they paid for it and the reasons for them doing this. Attention is also paid to the general and regional causes of these sales of land. The perspective adopted is largely that of the industrial sector, so that the economic and social repercussions are deemed to lie beyond the scope of this work, and even the immediate consequences of the purchases of land are touched on only in passing. The timber companies were most active in acquiring land in 1900-1920, over which period their holdings increased more than 6-fold (from 79 690 ha to 513 450 ha). In 1915 the companies owned 3.6% of the total surface area of Northern Finland, 8.8% of the private land and 5.7% of the total number of farm or forest properties. The land holdings of the timber companies decreased from 1920 onwards and became established at around 450 000 ha in the 1930s. This took place through the companies releasing land for settlement purposes, either voluntarily or under the Land Restoration Law of 1925, seeking in this way to rid themselves of land that was of no use to them. The chief focus of purchases of land by the timber companies in Northern Finland was in Kainuu, where they owned a total of 292 820 ha at the peak in this trend, in 1920. Over the period 1915-1939 about 60% of the land owned by such companies in Northern Finland was situated in Kainuu, and even by 1915 they had acquired about 27% of all the privately-owned land in the region. The main reason for the timber companies' interest in purchasing land was the expansion in sawn timber production, which meant that the volume of timber required for this purpose increased from 2.6 million stems in 1870 to 34 million by 1910. At the same time the pulp and paper industries were also stepping up production. There was a fear that Finland's forest reserves would be exhausted by this level of utilization. At the time of this great expansion in the forest industries the peasant farming population of Finland were still living at a more or less subsistence level. Productivity in agriculture was low, poverty and years of crop failure tried the limits of human endurance, and there were few opportunities for the farmers of Northern Finland to gain anything in the way of an income. One possible means of raising some cash was by selling timber from one's forest or undertaking lumbering work, and another was to sell one's whole farm to a timber company. Gradually a situation arose in which the peasant farmers became anxious to sell forest land and the industry was eager to buy it. The most prominent landowners were the trading houses of Oulu. Their land ownership was transferred in 1912 to Ab Uleå Oy, whose landed property was over 200 000 ha at its peak. Another prominent landowner was Puutavara Osakeyhtiö Kemi with its 75 000 ha of land. From 1925 onwards the companies' land ownership was concentrated in the hands of three major owners owing to selling and buying of land between the companies. Kajaanin Puutavara Osakeyhtiö owned 223 000 ha, Puutavara Osakeyhtiö Kemi 84 000 ha and Kymmene Ab 36 600 ha. The companies cannot be accused of having been dishonest in their buying of land. A market price was formed to woodland, and this price determined the value of the forests. The state also exercised some influence on the market price by selling its own forests.

Rights and obligations of the agricultural land ownership The purpose of my thesis is to make a summary of rights and obligations of the agricultural land ownership, describe and evaluate problems related to status of agricultural land owner. The thesis is composed of seven chapters, each of them allows to come to know aspects of the land ownership. Chapter One generally represents an ownership of the land with accent on a constitutional right, because proprietary right is one of the basic human rights. Because everybody has the right to own property and nobody can be deprived unlawfully of the property. Chapter Two describes historical development of ownership and chapter Third depicts an object of ownership, i.e. agricultural land, thus which means as a component of enviroment and as a production means of a primary human livelihood. Chapter Four defines a land owner, especially state into role of owner and process of restitution and of sale state land. Chapter Five is devoted to rights. This chapter is subdivided into four parts, part one is about tenure, second part about use of agricultural land. Next part is about treatment of land and the last part pays attention to civil action as protection of ownership. Extensively there is described a lease of land. Chapter Six is the principal and incorporates...

This study investigates the ownership and leasing of plots of land by women in four regions of England throughout the nineteenth century including Oxfordshire and surrounding counties (agricultural); West Yorkshire (industrial); London (the metropolis); and Durham ( mining). Innovative research was linked to standard econometric analysis utilising a new source of information about land, namely the books of reference produced by the railway companies. These books had unique advantages, particularly as legal documents scrutinised by Parliament and the public. Information was compiled about 23,966 plots including their uses and details of ownership, leasing and occupation; with a minimum sample of 400 plots per region, per decade. The women were recorded when identified in the documents as owners, lessors or lessees. The study compares the uses of plots with a woman owner or lessee with plots owned by men or institutions. The influence of parish characteristics and the roles of common law and equity on women’s plot ownership are considered, especially the effects of the Married Women’s Property Acts of 1870 and 1882. On average women owned 12.4 per cent of the sampled plots and leased 3.8 per cent, with regional variations. Plot usage and location were important at regional and parish level with women adapting their ownership to local economic conditions. Differences were found between the uses of women-owned plots and those owned by men and institutions. The greatest percentage of women-owned plots everywhere were owned or leased by women with no male or institutional co-owners. There was a multi-regional, long-term time trend towards a greater involvement of women in plot ownership during the century, with a spike in women’s ownership in Yorkshire and London during the Railway Mania. The Married Women’s Property Act of 1870 reduced women’s ownership of plots in every region except London, whereas the 1882 Married Women’s Property Act had mixed effects across the regions. Overall, the research challenges the view that legal and social constraints confined women’s ownership of land to wealthy widows and spinsters and shows that ownership was far more widespread than has been supposed.

This study examines landownership structures and settlement during the Middle Ages in the province of Östergötland in Sweden. It departs from a critical approach to the established view of social structure and property in the Scandinavian medieval society. The investigations are made at two levels. The first level is a cross section of the mid 16th century. This investigation shows that lay aristocrats and ecclesiastical institutions controlled most of the land, especially in the core areas of the parishes. The second level is a detailed investigation at the farm level in six parishes starting from the middle of the 16th century and working retrogresively to the early Middle Ages. This study shows that the landowning structure of the 16th century can be traced back to about AD 1300. For the early Middle Ages reconstructions are made through inheritance successions and genealogies of the aristocratic families. These reconstructions show that, in some parishes, most of the land was probably controlled by a few very rich families or dynasties during the early Middle Ages. The results lead to a question about the Viking Age and medieval society in general. This question is answered in a hypothesis stressing the development of the concept of land ownership in combination with the development of the land tenure system as one of the important factors for reproduction of local power during the Viking Age and early Middle Ages.

This paper disserts land ownership restrictions. Land ownership is restricted more intensively than other kinds of ownership due to the specificity of land as its object. Land ownership restrictions can arise either under law, under administative decisions, or under contracts. The restrictions are always represented by obligations either to allow, to omit, or to do something. The existence of land ownership restrictions is directly related to the level of social development. That is why land ownership restrictions can be found in very ancient documents such as the Code of Hammurabi. This paper, however, mainly focuses on various land ownership restrictions contained in the Charter of fundamental rights and freedoms, in legislation on nature protection, the forest act, lagislation on agricultural land resources protection, water management regulations, building code, legislation on land consolidation, law on roads and in legislation on neighborly relations. In the end the dissertation analyzes the land ownership restrictions arising from rights to property of another and from contracts with inter partes obligations.

The topic of this diploma thesis has got an interdisciplinary character, which results from a conflict of property right and ecological rights. The crucial point is the internal and external ownership restriction differentiation. This gives the answer to the question whether a compensation for restriction is provided or not. The thesis deals with legal reasons of the restrictions that arise from the specific character of land and also with the typology of restrictions according to its establishment. Selected restrictions regulated by particular environmental laws and the Building Code are analysed in the main part of the thesis. The conclusion points out the imperfections of legislation and provides possible solutions as well.

This diploma thesis deals with ownership rights to land. Due to change in legislation caused by Act No. 89/2012 Sb., Civil Code, there were many substantial changes in the area of land ownership, which have extensive impact on some of the institutes of this ownership. This thesis deals exactly with these changes and with newly or more precisely repeatedly implemented institutes of land ownership. Whole thesis aims to give some analysis of this institute with main focus on its specifics and differences. This object is fulfilled by general interpretation, which deals with characteristics of land ownership and its specifics and then it analyses some particular institutes of land ownership mainly those which were considerably changed or newly established by the ratification of the present Civil Code. Next to comparison of present and previous Czech legislation the last chapter of this thesis is devoted to comparison of Czech and German legislation.