The paper deals with the issues of the formation of the will of a legal entity with due regard to the need to establish the nature of the disposal of property for the purposes of vindication (either voluntary or involuntary). The author gives examples of various theories of a legal entity. The author highlights the difficulties of participation of legal entities in vindication disputes due to their abstract essence and the absence of a physical and tangible embodiment of a legal entity. The author concludes that the will of individuals (exercising the powers of the bodies of a legal entity) actually replaces the will of a legal entity. The paper also discusses the features of the formation of the will of a legal entity with a plurality of will-forming and/or will-exercising individuals, for example, if: 1) the decision on the alienation or transfer of property is made by a group of individuals (general meeting of participants, board of directors), or 2) the powers of the sole executive body are granted to several persons, or 3) several sole executive bodies have been formed in a legal entity. With regard to these features, the author concludes which persons’ will is considered the will of a legal entity.

The paper is devoted to examining objects of civil rights in order to establish whether it is possible to subject them to vindication. The paper analyzes such objects as things, “incorporeal things”, non-cash funds, uncertified securities, intellectual property, shares in the authorized capital of limited liability companies, digital rights, cryptocurrency, etc. The author determines the legal nature of the objects under consideration with due regard to the theory of law and legal stances of courts. As a consequence, the author substantiates the relativity of the possibility or impossibility of their vindication under Art. 301 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. Also, the author examines the issues of existence of special mechanisms for protection of rights holders of uncertified securities and shares in the authorized capital of limited liability companies to find the interrelation between them and vindication. The paper provides the analysis of judicial practice on the issue of claiming civil law objects from someone else’s illegal possession. Conclusions are drawn as to which objects can be subject to vindication under Art. 301 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, which objects can be claimed by analogy of the law and which objects cannot be subjected to vindication.

No abstract