| Abstract | Oduvijek je jedna od osnovnih ljudskih potreba bila stambeno se osigurati. Takvo razmišljanje bilo je prisutno i u rimskom društvu. Međutim, u vrijeme porasta broja stanovnika u rimskoj državi i poskupljenja zemljišta i stanogradnje to nije bilo lako ostvariti. Tako su mnogi rješenje vidjeli u institutu superficies. Unatoč strogim pravilima i shvaćanjima koja su kočila razvitak navedenog instituta, poput superficies solo cedit, potrebe društva usmjeravale su pravo na održivo zaobilaženje tih pravila te postupno stvaranje instituta superficies kao zasebnoga stvarnog prava. Tako je došlo do ugovora kojima se dozvoljavalo podizati zgradu na tuđem zemljištu. Ugovor kojim je taj odnos zasnivan bio je ili locatio conductio tj. ugovor o zakupu, ili emptio venditio, ugovor o kupnji. Uživatelj (superficiarus) je, prema vlasniku zemljišta, stjecao samo zahtjev obvezne prirode koji je mogao ostvarivati tužbama actio ex condutio ili actio ex emptio.. Ipak, to se promijenilo pružanjem interdiktne zaštite superficijaru (interdictum de superficiebus). Pretor je u klasično doba počeo, od slučaja do slučaja, pružati superficijaru i zaštitu putem actio in rem, kako protiv trećih, tako i protiv vlasnika zemljišta. Na taj način je izgrađen sistem stvarnopravne zaštite superficijara, koji je u Justinijanovu pravu imao na raspolaganju sve stvarnopravne tužbe kao i vlasnik. Iz rimskoga se superficies razvilo suvremeno superficijarno pravo koje danas postoji u pravnim poredcima romanske pravne tradicije, primjerice, u Italiji i Francuskoj. Pravno uređenje prava građenja u suvremenom hrvatskom zakonodavstvu u određenoj mjeri, ali nikako prevladavajuće ili cjelovito ima temelje u institutu rimskog superficies, no među njima postoje i određene razlike. Potrebe društva i razvoj današnjeg prava odvele su u mnogočemu pravo građenja u drugom smjeru. |
| Abstract (english) | Housing has always been one of the basic human needs. That need was also present in Roman society. However, at the time of the increasing number of inhabitants in the Roman state and the increasing price of land and housing, this was not easy to achieve. The solution was in the superficies institute. Despite the strict rules and understandings that hindered the development of superficies, such as superficies solo cedit, the needs of society directed the law to the gradual creation of the superficies institute as a separate property law. That's how they reached the contract which allowed the construction of a building on someone else's land. The contract on which this relationship was based was either a locatio conductio, a lease contract, or an emptio venditio, a purchase contract. According to the owner of the land, the user (superficiarus) acquired only a mandatory protection that could be achieved by lawsuits actio ex condutio or actio ex emptio. However, this changed with the provision of interdict protection to the superficiar (interdictum de superficiebus). In the classical era, the praetor began to provide, on a case-by-case basis, protection through actio in rem, against third parties and against the landowner. So, property law protection of superficiar was achived in Justinian's codification and then superficiar had at his disposal all legal claims in property law, just like the owner. From the Roman superficies, modern superficial law developed, which today exists in the legal systems of the Roman legal tradition, for example, in Italy and France. The legal regulation of right to build in contemporary Croatian legislation is to a certain extent, but by no means predominant or complete, based on the Roman institute of superficies, but there are also certain differences between them. The needs of society and the development of today's law have taken right to build in a different direction. |
