Informacja

Drogi użytkowniku, aplikacja do prawidłowego działania wymaga obsługi JavaScript. Proszę włącz obsługę JavaScript w Twojej przeglądarce.

English (EN)·Polski (PL)·Yкраїнський (UK)
Przejdź do strony domowej biblioteki Centralna Biblioteka Wojskowa Link otwiera się w nowym oknie Logo biblioteki Prolib Integro - strona głównaCentralna Biblioteka Wojskowa

Wyszukujesz frazę "opiekun" wg kryterium: Temat

  Lista filtrów
Wyrównaj
    Wyświetlanie 1-5 z 5
    Tytuł:
    KRONIKA. Kronika Wydziału Społecznej Opieki nad Zabytkami Przeszłości Polskiego Towarzystwa Krajoznawczego
    Autorzy:
    Szymański, S.
    Powiązania:
    https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/537522.pdf
    Data publikacji:
    1951
    Wydawca:
    Narodowy Instytut Dziedzictwa
    Tematy:
    Towarzystwo Opieki nad Zabytkami Przeszłości
    społeczna odpowiedzialność za zabytki
    Społeczna Opieka nad Zabytkami
    społeczny opiekun zabytków
    współpraca z harcerzami
    Źródło:
    Ochrona Zabytków; 1951, 3-4; 215-221
    0029-8247
    Pojawia się w:
    Ochrona Zabytków
    Dostawca treści:
    Biblioteka Nauki
    Artykuł
    Tytuł:
    W sprawie nowelizacji "Ustawy o ochronie dóbr kultury i o muzeach"
    PROPOSAL FOR AMENDMENT TO THE LAW ON PROTECTION OF CULTURAL GOODS AND MUSEUM PRACTICE
    Autorzy:
    Pawłowski, Zbigniew
    Powiązania:
    https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/539084.pdf
    Data publikacji:
    1976
    Wydawca:
    Narodowy Instytut Dziedzictwa
    Tematy:
    Ustawa o ochronie dóbr kultury i muzeach
    nowelizacja ustawy o ochronie dóbr kultury
    zabytki w rękach prywatnych
    dotacja na roboty konserwatorskie
    społeczny opiekun zabytków
    Opis:
    The author, dealing for several dozen years past with social protection of historical monuments, discusses the legal aspect of monument protection against the background of the relevant Law of 1962. What is tackled in greater detail is the question of the possibilities of saving monuments which are privater or social property. Stress is laid on lack of coordination between the provisinons of the Law and those binding on other ministries and bodies liable to command of historical buildings and monuments (e.g. the Ministry of Agriculture). A postulate is made for incorporating in the Law of a more explicit ban on building work being conducted on the area of, or within, historical monuments without the permission of the Head of the Voivodship Conservator’s Office. The final part of the article is devoted to the importance of, and the part played by, social coustodians of monuments who encounter in their work lack o f understanding on the part of the local authorities and users of historical buildings as well as other monuments. The author concludes in a postulate for amending the Law of 1962 in regard to all the questions raised in his article.
    Źródło:
    Ochrona Zabytków; 1976, 4; 295-297
    0029-8247
    Pojawia się w:
    Ochrona Zabytków
    Dostawca treści:
    Biblioteka Nauki
    Artykuł
    Tytuł:
    Prawna opieka nad zabytkami – wybrane aspekty
    Legal guardianship of historic monuments – selected aspects
    Autorzy:
    Brudnicki, Jacek
    Powiązania:
    https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/537611.pdf
    Data publikacji:
    2014
    Wydawca:
    Narodowy Instytut Dziedzictwa
    Tematy:
    zabytek
    zabytek nieruchomy
    opieka nad zabytkami
    ochrona zabytków
    dobra kultury
    społeczny opiekun zabytków
    samorząd terytorialny
    własność zabytku
    instytucje kultury wyspecjalizowane w opiece nad zabytkami
    Opis:
    This article aims at discussing the legal issue of guardianship of monuments by analysing the definition of guardianship of monuments, specifying the activities carried out by the individual entities under the guardianship and comparing the definitions of guardianship and protection of monuments. The term of guardianship of monuments was reintroduced to the Polish legal system along with entrance of the Act of 23 July, 2003 on the protection of monuments and of the guardianship of monuments into force. According to the legislators, this term, construed directly, lays down the scope of rights and obligations of the owner or holder of monument, related for the most with custody of the monument. However, the term of monument guardianship refers also to the other entities, being not the holders of the monument. Pursuant to the provisions of the Act of 23 July, 2003 on the protection of monuments and of the guardianship of monuments, also the governmental administration authorities, self-governmental administration authorities and institutions of culture specialized in the guardianship of monuments and social guardians shall be competent for carrying-out specific activities in the area of guardianship of monuments. The guardianship of monuments is of individualized nature, and the entity competent for its performance is the owner or holder of the monument. From the civil law perspective, the guardianship of monument constitutes a set of obligations resulting in limitation of the property right. The guardianship is performed by taking specific actual actions (e.g. carrying-out conservation, restoration or construction works in the monument) and by ensuring proper conditions for carrying-out scientific activities. From the legal perspective, the guardianship refers to the monuments i.e. the objects compliant with the legal definition of the ‘monument’, laid down in Article 3 (1) of the Act of 23 July, 2003 on the protection of monuments and of the guardianship of monuments, regardless of the fact, whether these are covered by any form of protection (e.g. entry into the register or record of monuments), or not. The author reviews the definition of ‘monument’ currently in force critically, pointing out at relativisation of this term. The Act of 23 July, 2003 on the protection of monuments and of the guardianship of monuments introduces for the first time the terms of protection and guardianship of monuments. The basic differences between these two terms include designating the competent entity and specifying its rights and obligations. The obligations related to guardianship of monument, in direct approach, are targeted on its owner or holder, whereas the protection of monuments is performed by the public administration. Key similarities between the protection and guardianship of monuments include common object of the protection and guardianship (monument) and common purpose behind them i.e. preservation of monument in possibly best condition. The territorial self-government units play a double role as the entities performing the guardianship of monuments. On one hand, as the owners or managers of monuments, are obliged to take care of them, whereas on the other hand, guardianship of monuments is also one of public tasks, for delivery of which such territorial self-government units have been appointed. The tasks of the commune include establishing and keeping the record of monuments in order to deliver the key task of the territorial self-government units within the guardianship of monuments i.e. drawing-up the monument guardianship programmes. The institutions of culture specialized in the guardianship of monuments are also involved. The National Heritage Board of Poland is responsible, on behalf of public authorities, for performing scientific research and documenting the monuments as well as popularization and distribution of knowledge on the monuments and their importance for both history and culture. The tasks of the National Institute for Museums and Public Collections include, among others, collecting and propagating knowledge on the museums, museum exhibits, public collections and historical objects as well as forming social awareness in the area of values and preservation of cultural heritage. Also the museums, with significant amounts of movable and archaeological monuments, play an important role in the guardianship of monuments. The specific nature of the activity of the social guardians of monuments lays behind the motivation, the heart of which is their interest in monuments and internal need to care of them. The social guardians of monuments take the actions targeted on preserving the monuments’ value and maintaining them in possibly best condition as well as propagating knowledge about them. The summary consists in evaluation of distinction between the protection and guardianship of monuments. This differentiation seems to be transparent and straightforward only at the very first moment. Thorough analysis reveals that the term of guardianship of monument covers numerous meanings and connotations, depending on the targeted entity. The author points out the issue of unequal allocation of obligations related to preservation of cultural heritage between the public authorities and monuments’ holders. Therefore the afterthought, whether maintaining of the differentiation between protection and guardianship of monuments is necessary, seems to be reasonable. At the same time, the role of the state in the area of its constitutional obligation to preserve the national heritage should be defined anew to impose more tasks on the public authorities.
    Źródło:
    Ochrona Zabytków; 2014, 2; 49-72
    0029-8247
    Pojawia się w:
    Ochrona Zabytków
    Dostawca treści:
    Biblioteka Nauki
    Artykuł
      Wyświetlanie 1-5 z 5

      Ta witryna wykorzystuje pliki cookies do przechowywania informacji na Twoim komputerze. Pliki cookies stosujemy w celu świadczenia usług na najwyższym poziomie, w tym w sposób dostosowany do indywidualnych potrzeb. Korzystanie z witryny bez zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies oznacza, że będą one zamieszczane w Twoim komputerze. W każdym momencie możesz dokonać zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies