Modern problems of legal regulation of land easement: boundaries of property and obligation law

2026

Full text Open access: Hybrid Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.46914/2959-4197-2026-1-1-61-70
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

This article provides a comprehensive examination of the legal nature of land easements within the framework of Kazakhstan’s civil and land legislation. The study explores the historical development of easements, the interplay between their property-law and obligation-law components, and their contemporary significance in ensuring the balance of interests among participants in land and property relations. The findings reveal inconsistencies between civil and land law norms relating to the definition of the easement object, its alienability, and the distinction between private and public easements. These discrepancies hinder uniform interpretation in practice, particularly in establishing easement fees, determining the grounds for termination, and protecting the rights of owners of burdened land parcels. The scientific novelty of the study lies in substantiating the dual legal nature of easements as complex constructs combining features of both property and obligation law. The research also emphasizes the need for clearer statutory limitations on the scope and exercise of easement rights. The practical significance of the article is reflected in recommendations for improving legislative regulation, enhancing legal certainty, optimizing state registration mechanisms, and strengthening judicial practice in resolving land disputes. The results provide a theoretical and applied foundation for further development of the land easement institution in Kazakhstan.