Abstract

Controversies are aroused among the advocates of permissibility of renouncement of perpetual usufruct as to the legal grounds thereof, which is reflected in the judgments of the Supreme Court. No direct legal regulation of that issue has led to the emergence of two opposite views, one of which referred to the similar application of Art. 179 of the Civil Code, which is no longer binding, and the other to such application of Art. 246 of the Civil Code. Due to the fact that Art. 179 of the Civil Code ceased to be binding, a solution has been presented in the cases law according to which in the situation discussed Art. 902¹ of the Civil Code is similarly applicable. Doubts in this respect may result in restricting the exercise of their rights by perpetual usufructuaries, and the change of the concept of the legal grounds for renouncement of perpetual usufruct gives rise to consequences that are crucial for the practice.