Unstoppable force meets immovable object: Peacock's Headlong Hall and the autonomy of infrastructure

2020 ◽  
Vol 42 (3) ◽  
pp. 257-273
Author(s):  
Chris Ewers
Keyword(s):  

In the development of material law in Indonesia, it is known both registered objects and unregistered objects that by analogy, registered objects are categorized as immovable objects. In Indonesia, aircraft are being classified as a registered object that can be guaranteed in the form of the mortgage as a debt settlement. Along with the development of law and society, the mortgage regulations are only mentioned briefly in the Indonesian Law of Fiduciary and the Law of Notary Position which state that an aircraft can be guaranteed in the form of a mortgage. However, until recently, any particular regulations regarding aircraft mortgage in Indonesia are not yet available. This research is a normative study that uses historical, statute, and comparison approaches. The problems examined in this study: firstly, how the mortgage as a material guarantee institution in Indonesia is being regulated. Secondly, does the mortgage institution have the potential as an alternative object of material guarantee for aircraft? The result of the study shows that the regulations on aircraft mortgage in Indonesia still refer to the ones in the Indonesian Civil Code. Meanwhile, the institution that has the potential as an alternative object of material guarantee for aircraft is in the form of mortgage because an airplane is a registered object which is analogous to an immovable object. It can be concluded, therefore, that there is a weakness in aircraft mortgage stipulation in Indonesia which may create legal uncertainty and weaken the position of the creditor. Therefore, along with the development of the community and the existence of legal certainty, it is necessary to make an aircraft mortgage law immediately.


Heritage ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 408-434
Author(s):  
Ignacio Rodríguez Temiño

The economic assessment of damage to movable and immovable objects considered part of archaeological heritage is a matter of increasing interest, both at the legal level and in terms of government management. The primary reason for this interest is the urgent need to agree on a sound and reliable approach to economically quantifying not so much the cultural value of the damage caused as the civil liability for having caused it in those cases in which it was produced by a harmful human act. Assessment methods require a broad consensus to be considered reliable. The lack of consideration given to this matter has only made the absence of such a consensus more acute. This paper offers a mainly Spanish case-based analysis of the most common valuation methods for both movable and immovable archaeological objects. With regard to movable objects, it examines the problems involved in both the exclusive use of an object’s market price as its cultural value and the lack of justification for the chosen valuation system, concluding that current methods are insufficient. This insufficiency, also perceived by the authors of the expert reports used in the analyzed proceedings, has been dealt with arbitrarily. With regard to immovable object, it concludes that the systems currently used to assess the damage to sites are likewise insufficient, despite having been legally acknowledged in some cases. This paper will thus examine the methods used in environmental assessments—whose parallels with archaeological heritage are clear—and proposes that they be adapted for this purpose.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document