Immovable monuments - common good justifying interference with the right to property

• Autorzy: Smarż, Joanna
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The protection of the common good is a prerequisite for interference with the right to property in, inter alia, the protection of monuments. Indeed, the exercise of this right is restricted by analogous rights enjoyed by other persons. However, any such restriction of the right to property must be dictated by the important interest of the owner, other subjects of the law and the interest of the community concerned.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

immovable monument; protection of monuments; common good; property right; legal regulation

• Czasopismo: Budownictwo i Prawo
• Rocznik: 2024
• Tom: R. 27, nr 4
• Strony: 32--35
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 19 poz.

Twórcy

autor

Smarż, Joanna

• University of Radom, Faculty of Law and Administration, University of Radom Kazimierza Pułaski in Radom

Bibliografia

• [1] Sienkiewicz T., Serving the common good and national identity in the protection of monuments, [in:] K. Kułak-Krzysiak, J. Parchomiuk (ed.) Serving the common good, Warszawa 2016: 301.
• [2] Zajadło J., Zeidler K., The value of a monument [in:] K. Zeidler (ed.), Lexicon of monument protection law. 100 basic concepts, Warszawa 2010: 376.
• [3] Constitution of the Republic of Poland of April 2, 1997, Journal of Laws of 1997, No. 78, item 482 as amended
• [4] Smarż J., The special role of local government in the protection and care of monuments, Ius Et Administratio, 2023, 4(53): 181.
• [5] Journal of Laws of 2022, item 840, as amended, hereinafter also referred to as: on the protection and care of monuments
• [6] Journal of Laws of 2024, item 725, as amended, hereinafter referred to as: Construction Law
• [7] Smarż J., Special conditions for carrying out construction works on immovable monument [in:] Budownictwo i Prawo 2019, 2: 9-11.
• [8] Judgment of the Supreme Administrative Court of January 24, 2017, II OSK 1052/15, Legalis no. 1578479.
• [9] Zalasińska K., Zeidler K., The issue of valuation as the basis for the decisions of the provincial conservator of monuments [in:] Valuation in the protection and conservation of monuments, Szmygin B. (ed.), Warszawa-Lublin 2012: 243.
• [10] Golat R., Act on the protection and care of monuments. Comment, Kraków 2004: 27 [in:] Mularski K., On the treasures of „de lege lata” and „de lege ferenda”, MOP 2009, 12.
• [11] Smarż J., Cultural heritage as a public good [in:] Public goods in administration, (ed.) Woźniak M., Pierzchała E., Toruń 2014: 319.
• [12] Zeidler K., Cultural property as the subject of restitution [in:] Zeidler K., Restitution of cultural property from the standpoint of the philosophy of law (ed.), Warszawa 2011: 99.
• [13] Pruszyński J., Trade in works of art, the right to cultural heritage and the Common Market [in:] Zeszyty Naukowe Wyższej Szkoły Informatyki, Zarządzania i Administracji w Warszawie 2003, 1: 23.
• [14] Zeidler K., Law on the protection of cultural heritage, Wolters Kluwer, Warszawa 2007: 137.
• [15] Ruszkiewicz B., The impact of the decisions of the voivodeship conservator of monuments on the exercise of ownership of immovable monuments [in:] K. Zeidler (ed.), Law on the protection of monuments, Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Gdańskiego, Warszawa-Gdańsk 2014: 319-329.
• [16] Journal of Laws of 2023, item 977 as amended
• [17] Journal of Laws of 2022, item 2440.
• [18] Ref. no. II OSK 494/05, Legalis No. 74673, cited many times, including: in the judgment of the Voivodeship Administrative Court in Kraków of January 12, 2023, II SA/Kr 1314/22, Legalis No. 2918541.
• [19] Niewiadomski Z., Asman T., Dessoulavy-Śliwiński J. et al., Construction law. Commentary, Legalis el. 2024, Commentary on art. 5.