TYPES OF PROPERTY RIGHTS SUBJECT TO LEVY IN ENFORCEMENT PROCEEDINGS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32689/3083-7359.2026.2.10Keywords:
property law, right of claim, law of obligations, property, creditor, debtor, receivables, foreclosure, enforcement proceedings, enforcementAbstract
The article is devoted to the study of the problem of the correlation of property law and the obligatory right of claim as property that can be enforced. The legal nature of the right of claim is analyzed both as an element of the content of the obligatory legal relationship and as an independent property asset capable under certain conditions of acting as an object of civil turnover and forced sale. It is determined that for the right of claim to acquire the meaning of an independent property asset, its reality is essential, certainty on the basis of occurrence, content and scope, economic value, alienability and the possibility of separation from the person of the original creditor. The provisions of the Law of Ukraine "On Enforcement Proceedings" and the Commercial Procedure Code of Ukraine, which regulate the enforcement of property and funds belonging to the debtor from other persons, have been studied. It is established that it is necessary to distinguish between two legal structures: foreclosure directly on the right of claim as a property right of the debtor and enforcement of funds or other property that a third party is obliged to transfer to the debtor as a result of the fulfillment of the relevant obligation. It is substantiated that until the moment of such performance, the component of the debtor's property sphere is the right of claim, and not the specific property of a third party. Based on the analysis of the practice of the Supreme Court, it has been established that the application of the collection mechanism requires confirmation of the real existence of the relevant debt, its amount and other circumstances that characterize the right of claim as a certain property asset. Attention is drawn to the possibility of forced transfer of the right of claim regardless of the will of its bearer and at the same time preserving the derivative nature of the acquired right. Insufficient consistency between the civil law nature of the law of obligations of the claim and the procedural mechanisms for directing its economic value to the satisfaction of the creditor's claims has been revealed. The expediency of legislative delimitation of foreclosure on property right and on the property result of its implementation, as well as the introduction of differentiated procedures for the enforcement of certain types of property rights, taking into account their legal nature, has been substantiated.
References
Holubieva, N. Yu. (2016). Pravo vymohy kredytora yak riznovyd mainovoho prava (obiekt tsyvilnykh prav). Visnyk Pivdennoho rehionalnoho tsentru Natsionalnoi akademii pravovykh nauk Ukrainy. № 9. S. 52–61. https://irbis-nbuv.gov.ua/cgi-bin/irbis_nbuv/cgiirbis_64.exe?C21COM=2&I21DBN=UJRN&IMAGE_FILE_DOWNLOAD=1&Image_file_name=PDF%2Fvprc_2016_9_10.pdf&P21DBN=UJRN
Podolskyi, A. (2024). Zvernennia stiahnennia na debitorsku zaborhovanist: shcho slid urakhuvaty. Zakon i biznes. 22.11.2024. https://unba.org.ua/publications/9748-zvernennya-
Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu u skladi kolehii suddiv Kasatsiinoho hospodarskoho sudu vid 22.01.2024 u spravi № 917/234/21. YeDRSR № 116510822. https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/116510822
Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu u skladi kolehii suddiv Kasatsiinoho hospodarskoho sudu vid 25.12.2024 u spravi № 902/831/23. https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/124199153
Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu vid 09.01.2024 u spravi № 908/1276/21 (908/921/22). https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/116175222
Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu u skladi kolehii suddiv Kasatsiinoho hospodarskoho sudu vid 25.03.2026 u spravi № 910/9063/22. https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/135155889
Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu u skladi kolehii suddiv Kasatsiinoho tsyvilnoho sudu vid 18.11.2021 u spravi № 757/22247/19-ts. https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/101211398
Pro vykonavche provadzhennia: Zakon Ukrainy vid 02.06.2016 № 1404-VIII. Vidomosti Verkhovnoi Rady Ukrainy. 2016. № 30. St. 542. https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/1404-19#Text
Hospodarskyi protsesualnyi kodeks Ukrainy: Zakon Ukrainy vid 06.11.1991 № 1798-XII. Vidomosti Verkhovnoi Rady Ukrainy. 1992. № 6. St. 56. https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/1798-12#Text
Krasutskyi, V. V. (2021). Tsyvilno-pravove rehuliuvannia vidstuplennia prava vymohy do mainovoho poruchytelia. Yurydychnyi visnyk. № 2. S. 194–200. https://www.yurvisnyk.in.ua/v2_2021/2_2021.pdf
Lokhmatov, O. A., Kalakura, V. Ya. (2024). Normatyvni ta sudovi aspekty vidstuplennia prava vymohy u zakonodavstvi Ukrainy ta zarubizhnykh krain. Visnyk Kyivskoho natsionalnoho universytetu imeni Tarasa Shevchenka. Mizhnarodni vidnosyny. № 1 (57). S. 103–110. https://intern.bulletin.knu.ua/uk/article/view/1526/2269
Tarasenko, L. L. (2025). Osoblyvosti zdiisnennia vykonavchoho provadzhennia pry zvernenni stiahnennia na obiekty avtorskoho prava. Analitychno-porivnialne pravoznavstvo. № 5. Ch. 1. S. 303–308. https://journal-app.uzhnu.edu.ua/article/view/342315/330139





