საერთო საკუთრების ინსტიტუტი (შედარებით სამართლებრივი ანალიზი)

In Georgia as in the world, the proprietorship is one of the most important rights. The present work is about the common ownership institute and regulation of the matter by Georgia and other countries’ legislation as well. Before common ownership, general ownership precept is also explained, its constitutional-legal meaning, civil-legal understanding in Georgia and also other countries’ legislation. What place does ownership generally holds in an independent government and to what extent is it protected by the constitution, when it gets limited and if limiting proprietorship rights is at all permissible, that is considered the absolute right in most countries.
In the work covered steps of the common ownership is presented and analyzed, historical stages, from where the mentioned institute comes from, what changes did the institute go through and how did it form in modern legislation, why could not it achieve recognition in some countries and why does it cause skeptical attitude.
The comparison is mainly done to the other countries of Roman law family and USA as well. It is expressed what faults the institute contains and what problems does it cause between joint owners. What causes legal disputes, if it’s possible to make any changes in legislation to simplify problematic relationships caused by common ownership between joint owners.
The topicality of the work is conditioned by that in Georgia and other countries common ownership causes many problems and disagreements between joint owners that often lead to legal disputes. The mentioned problems are conditioned by human nature and also certain faults in various legal systems. During the research comparison method is used, parallels are drawn mainly with European private law and common ownership regulation in the countries to be discussed.
The aim of the work is to demonstrate common fault - characteristic to common ownership institute in general, ways of solving problems caused by common ownership are given based on foreign country legislation and court practice comparative analyzes.