A rendszerváltozás utáni földtörvények földhasználattal kapcsolatos rendelkezéseinek összehasonlító elemzése
The purpose of this essay is to introduce the circumstances of Hungary’s land acts, which were valid in the past 30 years, what proportions influenced the lawmaker, and what type of results were achieved by the making of these acts. After these, i’d like to compare the 1994. LV. act with the 2013. C...
Elmentve itt :
| Szerző: | |
|---|---|
| Testületi szerző: | |
| Dokumentumtípus: | Könyv része |
| Megjelent: |
2018
|
| Sorozat: | Szegedi Jogász Doktorandusz Konferenciák
8 Jog határok nélkül 8 |
| Kulcsszavak: | Földtörvény, Földhasználat |
| Tárgyszavak: | |
| Online Access: | http://acta.bibl.u-szeged.hu/75008 |
| Tartalmi kivonat: | The purpose of this essay is to introduce the circumstances of Hungary’s land acts, which were valid in the past 30 years, what proportions influenced the lawmaker, and what type of results were achieved by the making of these acts. After these, i’d like to compare the 1994. LV. act with the 2013. CXXII. act through the most important land use pretence. As we can see from the title, the main goal is to analyze the land acts after the system change but in my opinion, it is advised to review the times before the system change, until 1987 to be accurate, when the Parliament made the I. act which created the basics of private property proportions in agriculture. The most important provision in connection to this topic is that it allowed everybody to gain ownership of the fieldland. In this context, the noun „everybody” also contains foreign private individuals. We’ll learn from the essay that how did the introduction of the ticket restitution led to a twist in tenures in the later stages. During the recompense, the state would have liked to compensate the previously harmed or their offspring by giving back their lands. The idea was to make the agriculture flourish this way in Hungary. This didn’t turn out the way it was planned because the previous owners were old or their inheritors changed the way of their living. This way, by cheaply purchasing restitution tickets, basically anybody, anywhere could bid for any type of farming branch lands and gain respective immovables. This is the reason why the Parliament made the 1994. LV. act which ruled out the foreigner’s possibility of gaining acquisition of fieldlands in Hungary with a few exceptions. An unanswered question occures: “Why did the Goverment wait until now?” In the next part, I’ll review the factors that influenced the making of the 2013. CXXII. act. Since the validation of the our previous land act, Hungary joined the European Union and we have been given a new Basic Law. We weren’t prepared to meet the requirements of the accession contranct with the European Union since our previous law wasn’t prepared for it. From another point of view, Hungary’s new Basic Law records the definition of fieldlands properly and declares it as a strategical resource which seems appropriate since our country has a meaningful number of fieldlands. After the system change, it became a clear goal that only such a natural person could gain ownership of a fieldland who himself/herself will farm it. Since the P) article this goal is also constitutionally defended. Overall, after my analyses of the Ptk connection’s with the new fieldland act, it became clear that there was no such other act in the past which regulated the land law in such a wholly way. |
|---|---|
| Terjedelem/Fizikai jellemzők: | 427-436 |
| ISBN: | 978-963-306-640-9 |
| ISSN: | 2063-3807 |