This work addresses the subject of subjective rights, analyzing its content, configuration, and limitations. The different theories about their nature are compared: that of the will, that of the interest, the deniers of its existence (the normativist, that of Duguit and that of legal realism). Emphasis is placed on the debate on the exercise of such subjective rights, especially on two hypotheses discussed doctrinally: if the holder of a subjective right, in his belief, that such ownership allows him to exercise it, without any limit, or very much for the on the contrary, if this right, which enjoyed, can be exercised in a guilty or malicious manner, affecting and causing harm to third parties in their exercise.

Analysis that is oriented under the historical-axiological method and the analytical logic, until the determination, of the necessary peaceful and normal enjoyment of subjective rights, with criteria of rationality that emanate from its own nature and function, which implies the existence of some limits in its exercise, both intrinsic in nature (those derived from the very nature of law); as of extrinsic nature (those that are imposed by the legal system itself.