Fundamentals

Right of Use: What It Allows and How It Differs from Similar Legal Arrangements

By Daniel Sardá · Published on July 28, 2026

8 min read1,623 words

A right of use allows someone to use another person's property without acquiring ownership. Its scope depends on the instrument creating it and the applicable law.

A right of use, in the civil-law sense, allows a person to use someone else's property within certain limits without becoming its owner. When structured as a limited real right, it attaches directly to the property, while the owner retains title and any powers not granted to the user.

The term is also used more broadly for permission, a license, or contractual authorization. It is therefore not enough to know that someone “has the right to use” a home, a plot of land, or a vehicle. The source of that power, the document governing it, and the applicable law must all be identified.

Key idea: Being allowed to use property does not mean being allowed to sell it, mortgage it, or decide freely how all of its benefits will be exploited.

Ownership consists of powers that can be separated

Ownership generally combines several powers over property: using it, taking its fruits or proceeds, excluding others, altering it, and disposing of it. Those powers, however, do not always have to remain in the same hands.

An owner may retain title while granting another person a limited form of enjoyment. The user receives precisely the powers recognized by the instrument creating the right and by law. The owner retains the rest. This separation helps explain arrangements such as use, usufruct, and bare ownership, although each has a different scope.

Suppose Elena owns a farm and grants Marcos the right to use one plot to grow food. Marcos may cultivate it on the agreed terms, but he cannot sell the farm because it does not belong to him. Elena remains the owner, although she must respect the granted use for as long as the right remains in force.

This allocation of powers does not necessarily weaken property rights. On the contrary, it shows why clearly defining who may do what matters. From an institutional perspective, clear titles facilitate cooperation and make responsibilities more predictable without confusing possession, enjoyment, and ownership.

What the holder of a right of use may do

There is no single list that applies in every country. The first source to consult is the constitutive instrument: the act or document that creates the right. It may define the property, the beneficiary, the duration, permitted activities, and the extent to which the user may take its fruits or proceeds.

This priority appears in both the Spanish Civil Code, whose Article 523 refers first to the constitutive instrument, and the Argentine Civil and Commercial Code, whose Article 2154 defines use according to the scope established in that instrument.

In general terms, the user may:

• use the property for the recognized purpose;
• exclude interference incompatible with the right;
• receive the benefits expressly included;
• require the owner to respect the right while it remains in force.

But use does not necessarily entitle the user to the property's full economic return. In Spain, unless the instrument provides otherwise, Article 524 allows the user to take the fruits needed to meet the needs of the user and the user's family. That formula should not automatically be applied to other legal systems. Argentine law, for example, gives decisive weight to the scope set by the instrument.

In the farm example, the document might allow Marcos to consume the vegetables he grows, authorize him to sell part of the harvest, or restrict his activity to a specific area. Simply saying that he has “use” of the land answers none of those questions.

Key idea: The name of the legal arrangement is a useful guide, but its actual content can be understood only by reading the instrument together with the applicable law.

Limits and obligations: use without claiming everything

The user must remain within the scope of the right and, when required by the instrument and applicable law, preserve the substance of the property. The user may not act as if full ownership had been transferred or encroach upon powers that still belong to the owner.

The most important limits usually concern:

• the purpose of the use;
• the portion of the property covered;
• the beneficiaries;
• the receipt of fruits, proceeds, or income;
• the preservation and return of the property;
• the duration of the right.

There may also be duties to maintain the property, contribute to expenses, or repair damage. Their allocation is not universal. It may depend on the instrument, the extent of the user's enjoyment, and national law. The Spanish Civil Code, for example, connects certain burdens to whether the user consumes all the fruits; other jurisdictions allocate those obligations differently.

Nor should anyone assume that the user may assign, lease, or transfer the right. In Spain, Article 525 establishes the general rule that rights of use and habitation may not be leased or transferred. The governing rules and any exceptions must be checked in each country.

Use, usufruct, habitation, leases, and loans for use

Several legal arrangements allow someone to use another person's property, but that does not make them equivalent.

Right of use and usufruct

Usufruct generally grants broader enjoyment: it permits the usufructuary to use the property and take its fruits within the limits of the law and the constitutive instrument. A right of use is normally narrower or confined to a particular purpose.

The difference should not be reduced to a mechanical formula. In Argentina, if the instrument does not establish the scope of the use, Article 2154 provides that it is deemed to create a usufruct. This further illustrates why the wording of the instrument is decisive.

Right of use and habitation

A right of habitation focuses on living in a home belonging to another person. A right of use may apply to different kinds of property and benefits, including a house, a farm, or another asset capable of being used.

Spain regulates use and habitation together but distinguishes their powers in Article 524. Argentina separates them expressly: use appears in Articles 2154 and following, while habitation is defined in Article 2158.

A real right and a contractual relationship

A tenant, a borrower under a loan for use, and a person who receives permission may also use property belonging to someone else:

• Under a lease, the right to use arises from a contract and normally requires the payment of rent.
• Under a loan for use, a person receives an item free of charge, uses it, and later returns it.
• Under a permission, the authorization may be more limited and, depending on the circumstances, revocable.
• Under a real right of use, the entitlement legally attaches to the property and may have different effects against third parties.

The practical distinction depends on the legal system: formalities, registration or public-notice requirements, duration, and protection against third parties are not the same. The sensible approach is to examine the specific source of the entitlement rather than classify it solely because someone physically occupies or benefits from the property. The relationship between contracts and private property helps explain why arrangements that look similar may create different legal positions.

Key idea: Calling a contractual authorization a “right of use” does not, by itself, turn it into a real right.

How a right of use is created and how it ends

A right of use requires a valid legal source. It may arise from an act between persons, a testamentary provision, or another basis recognized under the relevant legislation. Formal requirements and, where applicable, registration depend on the country, the type of property, and the legal instrument used.

At a minimum, the document should make it possible to answer:

1. Who is the owner and who is the user? 2. What property, or what part of it, is covered? 3. What uses and fruits or proceeds are included? 4. What expenses and duties does each party assume? 5. How long does the right last, and what events terminate it?

The right may end when its term expires, when the beneficiary dies if the right was personal and granted for life, when the right of use and ownership come together in the same person, through waiver, or for other reasons provided by law. These grounds do not operate in exactly the same way in every jurisdiction.

In Spain, the Directorate-General for Legal Certainty and Public Faith has described use as a real, personal, and temporary right and has noted its connection to the grounds for terminating usufruct. That characterization is useful for understanding Spanish law, but it should not be presented as a transnational rule.

How to identify which right actually exists

Return to Elena and Marcos. If the document lets Marcos cultivate a plot and collect a limited amount of produce, the arrangement could be a real right of use. If he may exploit the entire farm and keep its returns, it would more closely resemble usufruct. If he pays monthly to occupy it, there may be a lease. If Elena merely lent him the land free of charge for one season, it may be a loan for use.

The label chosen by the parties matters less than the arrangement's actual legal content. To identify it, ask four questions: What is the source of the entitlement? What acts does it permit? Can it be enforced against third parties? Which law governs it?

A right of use shows that the powers associated with the right to property do not have to be concentrated in one person. They can be allocated among different people, but that flexibility requires understandable limits. A precise instrument protects the user, preserves the owner's powers, and reduces conflict. When the property or the right has significant value, its final legal classification should be reviewed under local law.