Period Of Limitation Of Action On The Vindication Of The Real Estate

Journal Issue:

Author Information: 

Doctor of Philosophy (Law), Associate Professor of the Department of Civil Law and Process at the Institute of Management


In the present article author deals with problems, arising from the use of rules of limitation in the vindication of objects by the arbitration courts. Particular attention is paid to the determination of the initial moment of the limitation period, when real estate is reclaimed from others unlawful possession. Author notes, that there is some uncertainty, due to the beginning of term from the statute of limitations to claim vindication. The difficult is due to the fact that for the time of search of the lost (stolen) things the owner cannot apply to the court for protection of violated rights, because the defendant, whose actions violated authority ownership, personally is not defined. At the same time the fact of the expiry of the limitation period is a separate ground for refusal in the lawsuit, in which case any of the other arguments in support of the declaration of the claim are not subject to review. Consequently, there is a question of how to define the starting point of the limitation period, when the owner was aware of the disposal of its ownership of certain things, but could not determine exactly who owns his thing, and to whom you must bring vindication requirement. Author analyzes existing legal acts, legal position of the judiciary branches. Author also examines views of Russian jurists. Author concludes that the moment of the period of limitation for the vindication of the claim has to be determined from the date, when the claimant knew of actual disposal of things from his possession, or when he found about the ground for challenging the registration of the property rights of the defendant.


Rei vindicatio, limitation period, real estate, civil code, requirements, law, Russia, Russian Federation.

[1] Grishaev S.P. Gosudarstvennaya registraciya veshhnyx prav // Zhurnal rossijskogo prava. 2006. No. 10. 
[2] Krasnova S.A. Vindikacionnoe pravootnoshenie: monografiya. M.: Infra-M, 2013.
[3] Morgunov S.V. Iskovaya davnost v pravilax o vindikacii // Vestnik Vysshego Arbitrazhnogo Suda Rossijskoj Federacii. 2005. No. 4.
[4] Motovilovker E.Ya. Teoriya regulyativnogo i oxranitelnogo prava. Voronezh, 1990.
[5] Nenashev M.M. Sposob zashhity prava: processualnye voprosy // Arbitrazhnyj i grazhdanskij process. 2011. No. 8.
[6] Novoselova A.A., Podshivalov T.P. Veshhnye iski: problemy teorii i praktiki: monografiya. M.: INFRA-M, 2012.
[7] Podshivalov T.P. Oxranitelnye pravootnosheniya i normy: grazhdansko-pravovoj aspekt // Vestnik Yuzhno-Uralskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya «prava». 2012. No. 43. vypusk 32.
[8] Podshivalov T.P. Negatornyj isk i zashhita prav na nedvizhimoe imushhestvo // ZAKON. 2011. No. 1. S. 86–95.
[9] Podshivalov T.P. Pravovoe znachenie gosudarstvennoj registracii prav na nedvizhimost // Sovremennoe pravo. 2012. No. 10.
[10] Podshivalov T.P. Pravovaya priroda iska ob osparivanii zaregistrirovannogo prava na nedvizhimost // Zhurnal rossijskogo prava. 2014. No. 5.