The rights in rem, which provide a direct domination over a thing and can be available against the world at large, don’t accord with the positive acts. However, one can’t argue that the rights in rem don’t correlate with them at all. For example, the real burden is a right in rem which obliges an owner of immovable property to fulfil an obligation to a beneficiary for which he/she is liable solely with the immovable property. The surety element that makes the real burden a right in rem is highly bound to the positive act. Similarly, a positive act can be bound to an easement, if it eases, enables or secures the exercise of the easement and doesn’t present a bigger encumbrance than the easement itself. The accessory positive act to the easement should be determined within the constitutive agreement of the easement and based on an entry in the land register. When it is not fulfilled, the servient property owner is only responsible of non-performance of the obligation. However, if a real burden is bound to the easement, the beneficiary can apply for the foreclosure of the pledged property. Still the property will largely be restricted and the number of legal transactions to be made at the land register will be doubled (especially if the real burden and the easement are established on the same immovable property), which provokes higher title deed fees. However, a need to bound the easement with a real burden instead of a positive act may remain. In this case, the real burden will be bound to the easement in two different ways. Firstly, the real burden may be independent. It correlates to the easement but there is no internal link within these two rights. The independent real burden may present a bigger encumbrance than the easement and is not necessarily intended to ease, enable or secure the exercise of the easement. It also can be established not only on the servient property, but also on the dominant. An independent real burden isn’t affected by the extinction of the easement; the obliged of the real burden should perform his/her obligation even if the easement ceases to exist. Stipulated by art 845 para 3 CCtr, the real burden can secondly be linked to an easement. The easement can be a real or personal one but it must be permanent, which means that it should be established at least for thirty years. While the redemption of an ordinary real burden which has lasted for thirty years may be requested by the debtor, a real burden linked to a permanent easement can’t be redeemed, unless any other extinction cause subsists. If the real burden could have been redeemed even if the easement to which it was linked would have existed, the interest of the easement right owner would have been substantially damaged. As it is linked to the easement, extinction of the easement will also cause the extinction of the real burden. The real burden is linked to the easement when there is an internal link between these two rights. The internal link appears primarily when the real burden eases, enables or secures the exercise of the easement. But unlike the accessory positive act bound to easement, the real burden can present a bigger encumbrance than the easement to which it is linked. The existence of the internal link also necessitates the establishment of the real burden and the easement on the same immovable property. The real burden serves for the exercise of the permanent easement as long as it exists and can’t be redeemed even if it lasts more than thirty years, unless there is any other cause of extinction. In this case, because those rights are established on the same immovable property, the partition of property will affect them both. If the easement can’t be transferred at some of the parts, the real burden will also be deleted from them. At this point, the real burden beneficiary needs to make a decision: either he/she will request redemption of real burden according to art 844 para 1, claiming that his/her rights are significantly endangered; or he/she will abandon a part of the surety.