1)Protection of ownership

2)Limited property rights

ART 545 .No one may be compelled to yield his ownership, unless for public purposes and for a fair
and previous indemnity.

Art. 555
Where plantings, constructions or works were made by a third party and with materials belonging to
the latter, the owner of the tenement has the right, subject to the provisions of paragraph 4, either to
keep the ownership of them, or to compel the third party to remove them.Where the owner of the
tenement requires to have the constructions, plantings or works suppressed, it shall be done at the
expense of the third party, and without any compensation for him; the third party may furthermore be
ordered to pay damages for loss which the owner of the tenement may have suffered.Where the owner
of the tenement prefers to keep ownership of the constructions, plantings or works, he must, at his
choice, repay the third party either a sum equal to that by which the tenement has increased in value,
or the cost of the materials and the price of the labour appraised at the date of repayment, account
being taken of the condition in which the said plantings, constructions or works are.Where the
plantings, constructions or works were made by an evinced third party who would not have been
liable to restoring the fruits owing to his good faith, the owner may not insist on the suppression of the
said works, constructions and plantations, but he has the choice to repay the third party either of the
sums referred to in the preceding paragraph.Any owner may compel his neighbour to a setting of
boundaries of their contiguous tenements. Setting boundaries shall be done at common expense.

Art. 578 .Usufruct is the right to enjoy things of which another has ownership in the same manner as
the owner himself, but on condition that their substance be preserved.

ART 605. A usufructuary is only bound to repairs of maintenance.Major repairs remain the
responsibility of the owner, unless they were occasioned by the lack of repairs of maintenance since
the beginning of the usufruct; in which case the usufructuary is also liable for them.

Chardonnet v Consorts Docet: the owner of a piece of land can be held liable for the excessive noise
caused by his lessee.
SARL Le Grand Verger v Widow Cozon and others: a usufructuary may use the object under
usufruct, but must take care of the object as well as retain the same use of the object. The right of
usufruct has an important impact on the right of ownership, which, following the creation of the
usufruct, becomes known as bare ownership. The usufructuary is limited in what he may do with the
object under usufruct. In general the usufructuary is awarded the right to use and to enjoy the object of
the owner, who, for the duration of the usufruct, is not entitled to do so. The  right to use includes
the right to lease the object (max duration 9 years, and for the same purpose of the original
usufruct). Kammergericht, 23 July 1991: the maintenance duty for a right-holder is therefore used to
limit the agreement the owner and the holder of a usufruct can make on the rights of the latter.
However, when parties stay within the maintenance duty, this agreement becomes part of the usufruct
itself and therefore will have effect against third parties.
(1) The neighbour of Mr. Lefevre constructed a very high fence that blocks the sun into a part of
his garden. Mr. Lefevre believes that there is no need for such a high fence between these
properties. In addition, in some parts the fence seems to enter too much into the property of
Mr. Lefevre. What can be done?

Houssin v Legrasse. No person may be deprived of their property that the degree of the
encroachment is of no relevance.

Our powers of ownership are limited.So the neighbour can not have a so high fence.
We could actually use here a doctrine of abuse of rights.We need to prove that somebody has
caused damages or had intention to do so.
Art 545

(2) The property of Mr. Lefevre is subject to a right of usufruct of Mr. Jean-Luc.The usufruct will
last for the next 5 years, after which Mr. Lefevre wants to give the house to his daughter.
However, he is afraid about the condition of the property, because Jean-Luc often organizes
big dinners and even rents the property for the wedding parties. What are the possibilities for
your client here?

Art. 578 .Usufruct is the right to enjoy things of which another has ownership in the same
manner as the owner himself, but on condition that their substance be preserved.
The substance has to be the same.

(3) Also, neighbours often complain that the parties and festivities that Jean-Luc organizes are
too loud and disturbing. Should Mr. Lefevre worry about it or it is a problem of Jean-Luc?

Chardonnet v Consorts Docet: the owner of a piece of land can be held liable for the
excessive noise caused by his lessee.
Mr.Lefevre should worry,because he could be liable for excessive noise.

Germany
Joseph is the owner of a semi-detached house (side A and side B) in Berlin with two parking
places that are situated in side A of the house. He decides to sell side A of the house (which
includes the two parking places) to Colin for 450,000 EUR and the two of them agree to
create a right of real servitude that allows Joseph to park one of his cars in side A’s parking
place. Few years after, Colin dies and his son, Thomas, inherites the house and refuses to
allow Joseph to park the car there. Joseph decides to bring a case before the District Court in
Berlin. He argues that Thomas is not entitled to refuse him to park his car in side A’s parking
place. On the other hand, Thomas argues that he can refuse because the right of real servitude
was created between Joseph and Colin, so it is not binding on him now.

Joseph is right ,because there was an agreement which represents the property rights.
Servitude property right.

§ § 1018 BGB
“A piece of land can, for the benefit of an owner of another piece of land, be burdened in
such a way, in which the owner may use this piece of land for specific purposes or in
which on the piece of land certain action cannot be taken or a certain right which follows
from the burdened piece of land against the other piece of land cannot be exercised”.