TEMPORAL FACTORS OF EXERCISE OF SUBJECTIVE CIVIL LAW. HISTORICAL ASPECT

Abstract

The article is devoted to the research of the topical issue of the temporal dimensions of the exercise of regulatory civil law and its relationship with the duration of the right to protection in case of violation, including by filing a claim. The historical progress of science on interpretations of public perception of the period of their existence is studied. It is established that initially, both scientific opinion and relevant legislation were based on the concept of a single statute of limitations, as a phenomenon that destroys even the undisputed right. It was believed that the expiration of a subjective right by prescription is a condition that accompanies its emergence. However, the further development of civil science, based on the differences of both legal nature and separate legal regulation of acquisitive and statute of limitations, has led to the realization of the need for separate legal regulation of these two institutions. This is reflected in the scientific perception of the relationship between the occurrence and termination of the period of existence of the claim and the duration of the subjective right itself, which received the violation. For a long time, science has argued that at the time of violation, the subjective right is transformed into a right to sue, and exists in this state for a specified period, and then, with the expiration of the statute of limitations, is terminated. However, the evolution of current legislation has led to a change in the concept and this time, because it was impossible to explain the rule of due performance of a long-standing obligation after the expiration of the statute of limitations (Part 1 of Article 267 CCU). Therefore, currently the most acceptable thesis is that the statute of limitations extinguishes only the right to sue, and not the subjective substantive right itself, ie the continuation of the subjective substantive right deprived of judicial protection after the expiration of the statute of limitations. Voluntary performance by the debtor at this time is due, and the debtor is not entitled to demand the return of the performance. But for the effectiveness of this legal construction, it must be added that it continues to exist not violated regulatory law, but protection, which has lost its coercive ability to implement. Therefore, the voluntary exercise of this right will be appropriate.