This investigation aims to clarify the path that both judicial operators and trial lawyers should follow, according to the guidelines given by the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court since 2000, to acquire domain over a real estate in which it has been exercised. possession for a certain time. If usucapion is conceptualized as an original way of acquiring ownership, it is important to clarify that not all real estate can occur in this way, because there are real estate that is imprescriptible, for being, for example, the State or property of owned by public entities. Under the previous context, I will explain in a general way what the ways of acquiring the domain mean in accordance with what is stated in article 673 of the Civil Code, its requirements, classes, and definitions, supporting myself for this section, in the contributions of different authors . Starting from chapter II, I will illustrate by means of graphics that I designed, each line of jurisprudence investigated, so that the reader can identify its changes over time. In the same way, I will differentiate the meanings and characteristics of the usucapión as an original way of acquiring the domain, in order to focus the different issues resolved in the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court. I will identify, for example, the specific issues regarding property for public use, imprescriptible fiscal property, property within the territory of the peasant population, black communities and indigenous community, and the rules that set the procedural iter against their acquisition, as well as the possibility 3 of exercising a membership action against the social interest housing properties.
publication date
April 12, 2021 4:38 PM
Research
keywords
Acquisition of property on a property for its use during a certain time
Analysis of article 673 of the Civil Code of Colombia
Jurisprudential analysis of the acquisitive prescription (usucaptión) in Colombia
