Abstract
The article is a critical commentary to the decision of the Supreme Court of 17 July 2019 (I CSK 630/17), in which it was stated that acquisitive prescription of an easement causes that the claims for remuneration for using the property in the period before usucaption expire. The Supreme Court justifies its view by referring to functional arguments. The Supreme Court asserts that the stabilizing function of acquisitive prescription should lead to the conclusion that after usucaption of an easement there should be no grounds and reasons for disputes concerning the period prior to it. However, this view finds no substantiation in the current state of legislation in light of Art. 222–230 of the Civil Code (protection of ownership) or Art. 172–176 of the Civil Code (acquisitive prescription).