Making the Multiple:

2019 ◽  
Vol 118 (4) ◽  
pp. 839-855
Author(s):  
Michele Spanò
Keyword(s):  
Legal Theory ◽  
Social Relation ◽  
Logical Form ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Private Law ◽  
The Social ◽  
Private And Public ◽  
The Commons ◽  
Subjective Rights ◽  
Do So

The essay argues for the compatibility between private law and the commons. In order to do so, it proposes an archeology of modern private law, which traces both the emergence of what will be called “modern topology” and the historical transformation of civil law into what we still know as private law. Private law is considered to be a product of modern legal theory which is radically tied with public law. The two are meant to have the very same logical form—individuality—which was the premise for the social relation of capital to be established. The pivot of this legal maneuver—which ended up with the exclusion of the commons from the realm of both private and public law—was the theory of subjective rights. To dismantle this construction, the essay proposes a critique of subjective rights as well as a trans-subjective approach to private law.

Private and Public Law

2020 ◽  
pp. 574-592
Author(s):  
Thomas W. Merrill
Keyword(s):  
Law And Economics ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Private Law ◽  
General Criterion ◽  
The Public ◽  
Private Ordering ◽  
Public Rights ◽  
Private And Public ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Derivatives Of

This chapter explores the relationship between private and public law. In civil law countries, the public-private distinction serves as an organizing principle of the entire legal system. In common law jurisdictions, the distinction is at best an implicit design principle and is used primarily as an informal device for categorizing different fields of law. Even if not explicitly recognized as an organizing principle, however, it is plausible that private and public law perform distinct functions. Private law supplies the tools that make private ordering possible—the discretionary decisions that individuals make in structuring their lives. Public law is concerned with providing public goods—broadly defined—that cannot be adequately supplied by private ordering. In the twentieth and twenty-first centuries, various schools of thought derived from utilitarianism have assimilated both private and public rights to the same general criterion of aggregate welfare analysis. This has left judges with no clear conception of the distinction between private and public law. Another problematic feature of modern legal thought is a curious inversion in which scholars who focus on fields of private law have turned increasingly to law and economics, one of the derivatives of utilitarianism, whereas scholars who concern themselves with public law are increasingly drawn to new versions of natural rights thinking, in the form of universal human rights.

Improperly Collected Taxes: The Border Between Private and Public Law

2010 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 125-161
Author(s):  
Sagi Peari
Keyword(s):  
Public Law ◽  
Legal Philosophy ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Private Law ◽  
Alternative Framework ◽  
Private And Public ◽  
Constitutional Right ◽  
Normative Rule

In recent years, Professor Birks’ doctrine of constitutional right to restitution has become a new normative rule with respect to the issue of restitution of improperly collected taxes. Nevertheless, the new doctrine has puzzled academic scholars. Profound questions regarding the conceptual “private law-public law” location of Professor Birks’ doctrine and the current status of traditional law doctrines have arisen.This study challenges Professor Birks’ doctrine and demonstrates that despite its universal adoption, the doctrine was based on weak premises. Furthermore, based on Professor Weinrib’s legal philosophy, this study develops an alternative framework to analyze the issue of improperly collected taxes. The study shows that the “private-public” puzzle and the doctrines traditional to improperly collected taxes may be coherently explained within this legal philosophy.

scholarly journals The measures to protect public legal interests in the civil process

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 69-85
Author(s):  
Svetlana A. Burmistrova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Civil Rights ◽  
Implementation Process ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
Social Good ◽  
Civil Process ◽  
The Social ◽  
Legitimate Interests ◽  
Rights And Interests ◽  
Subjective Rights

Introduction. The civil legislation of Russia has a list of general ways to protect civil rights. There is comprehensive list of ways to protect public-law subjective rights and interests either in legislation or in legal science. As a result, some methods of protection that are explicitly named in the law are widely used in practice and have been sufficiently studied in science, while others that do not have direct legislative support are little or practically not used in practice, which leads to weak protection of rights and interests that could be protected by such methods. Theoretical Basis. Methods. In order to make the most complete list of the methods of protecting public-law subjective rights and interests and, if possible, bring such methods into the system, the author of the article proceeded from the following ideas: – social interests regulated by law (legal interests) have a different probability of achieving the object (the social good they are aimed at) and are divided into three categories, namely interests with a maximum (subjective rights), minimum (legitimate interests) and intermediate probability of achieving the object (legitimate interests that can be transformed into subjective rights by an act of law enforcement); – legal interests in the implementation process go through a number of stages, each of which can be violated in a special way. Knowing what constitutes a violation in each of the stages, allows an accurate choice of a method of protection from the range of availale measures; – the importance of implementing legal interests for the society is not the same. General (public) significance leads to the fact that the interest is regulated by public law. The private significance of an interest entails its regulation by private law. Results. It is argued that public and private entities can be carriers of public legal interests. It is proved that relations arising from the implementation of public-legal interests can be based on subordination or equality, and therefore the subjects of public-legal relations can have a powerful, subordinate and equal status. The article presents a system of measures and measures that should be applied in cases of violations of public-legal interests of powerful, subordinate and equal participants in public-legal relations at various stages of the implementation of such interests. Discussion and Conclusion. The results obtained can serve as a basis for improving the procedural means of protection and proceedings for the protection of public legal interests.

scholarly journals Evaluation Concepts in Russian Codifications of Civil Law

Lex Russica ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 37-50
Author(s):  
V. G. Golubtsov
Keyword(s):  
Essential Feature ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Civil Code ◽  
Property Law ◽  
Private Law ◽  
Private And Public ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Basic Evaluation

Based on general legal and civilistic experience in the study of evaluative concepts, the author investigates the general and the specific in their civil law nature. As the result of the study, the author draws the conclusion that the existence of evaluative concepts forms a distinctive essential feature of civil law as private law. It is noted, however, that the doctrine, law-maker and law-enforcer need basic guidelines that will allow to define objective criteria for nominating concepts as evaluative, as well as for determining the boundaries of their systematic interpretation. Also, the author concludes that the impact of evaluation concepts on legal regulation in private and public law is different. In civil law, depending on the localization in the text of the Civil Code, it is possible to distinguish two groups of evaluation concepts. The first group includes the basic evaluation concepts that allow us to see the goals, meaning and specifics of civil law regulation. The second group, in the author’s opinion, includes peripheral evaluation concepts that are utilized by property law and separate contractual constructions and the presence of which allows to avoid unnecessary causality and, at the same time, makes it possible to bring legal regulation closer to real relations.

scholarly journals METHODOLOGICAL APPROACHES TO THE PROBLEM OF THE INTERRELATION BETWEEN PRIVATE AND PUBLIC LAW IN SETTLEMENT RELATIONS

2021 ◽  
pp. 85-92
Author(s):  
L. Panova
Keyword(s):  
Social Justice ◽  
Financial Market ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Financial Services ◽  
Financial System ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Private Law ◽  
Theoretical Understanding ◽  
Legal Standards ◽  
Private And Public

The article is based on the existing law doctrine of division of law into private and public. The author analyses the influence of the doctrine on the relationships that arise in the financial services markets. The author takes into account the results of researches conducted by domestic and foreign scholars, which were carried out in the field of law and economics. The author uses general scientific and special methods as those that form the basis of the work. The research substantiates that objectively the doctrine dividing law into private and public does not exist. Doctrine is the product of a sociocultural interpretation of the researcher's thinking process. At the same time, the doctrine is naturally refers to the structure of the financial market. The author analyses the internal mechanism of circulation of cash flows and settlements in the global financial market. This analysis is the empirical basis for the research and subsequent theoretical understanding. The author proves that the concept of separation of rights into private and public law is not a universal concept that is inherent in all countries. The doctrine is fundamental only in the countries with Romano-Germanic legal system. The idea of dividing law into private and public was not reflected at the doctrine level in the countries with Anglo-Saxon legal system. The problem of the substitution of concepts was enrooted directly in the very doctrine of law, which existed in Soviet times. It was connected with the absence of the concept of "private law" in the Soviet legal thinking. The idea of social justice changes beyond recognition in the direction of public law. The author focuses on the issue of how to ensure the sustainable development of the financial system and its main institutions (structures) using the theoretical concept of dividing law into private and public. The author emphasizes the need to take into account the diversity of legal understanding of the financial market as a social phenomenon. The research methodology should be as appropriate as possible to the research object. The idea of social justice should act as a regulator of mutual relations between members of society. Practical activity in the financial markets in the modern world tends to converge. Public law assumes the fulfilment of a social function. Therefore, the author comes to the conclusion that law is a means of reaching a compromise between members of society, provided that individual freedom is preserved and there is no need to oppose private law to public law. The author proves that European political and legal standards are built on such postulates, particularly concerning the field of calculations. Keywords: financial system, financial services markets, settlement relations, the doctrine of separation of rights into private and public.

Public/Private

2020 ◽  
pp. 466-480
Author(s):  
Jean-Bernard Auby
Keyword(s):  
Essential Feature ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Public Domain ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Roman Law ◽  
Private Sphere ◽  
Private Law ◽  
The Public ◽  
Private And Public ◽  
The Relationship

This chapter examines the distinction between public law and private law. It stresses the importance of being aware of this difference between the public/private and public law/private law dichotomies. The public–private divide is universal even if, from one society to another, it can be conceived differently in certain ways. All human communities have an idea about the relationship between the private sphere and the public domain. By contrast, the distinction between public law and private law is not universal. It may be ignored, rejected, or confined to a very limited sphere of operation as, traditionally, in common law systems. Conversely, the public law/private law distinction may be understood as an essential feature of the juridical world, as was the approach of Roman law, inherited by the continental legal systems.

Punitive Damages: Reorienting the Debate in Civil Law Systems

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 63-81
Author(s):  
María Guadalupe Martínez Alles
Keyword(s):  
Latin American ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Punitive Damages ◽  
Private Law ◽  
Clear Cut ◽  
American Experience ◽  
Private And Public ◽  
Anglo American ◽  
Country Specific

AbstractScholarly debates in a number of Latin American and European countries have recently focused on the legal institution of punitive damages. These debates have been primarily influenced by the Anglo-American experience with the institution. The dominance of an outcome-driven, interpretive approach to an inherently complex and contradictory practice in the prevailing Anglo-American scholarship on punitive damages, however, has seriously affected and likely distorted the comparative and normative scholarly debates over the introduction of the institution in countries that follow the civil law tradition. In this article, I argue that, in order to participate more meaningfully in the punitive damages debate, civil law scholars should, on one hand, refrain from attempts to improve the understanding of the Anglo-American practice while offering country-specific assessments of the authors’ own legal system’s (in)compatibilities with the institution; and, on the other hand, actively engage in thorough discussions regarding the fundamental theoretical grounding of the place of punishment in modern private law. The novelty of this scholarly approach will require private law scholars to acknowledge both the punitive elements currently hidden yet nonetheless patent in domestic private law practices of awarding damages and the constraining effect of the pervasively proclaimed yet easily disputable clear-cut line between private and public law.

The “Frontier” According to Paul de La Pradelle

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 130-134
Author(s):  
Benjamin Perrier
Keyword(s):  
Legal Theory ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Boundary Line ◽  
Private Law ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
Object Of Study

Essential author on the “frontier”, Paul de Geouffre de La Pradelle is known for his original legal theory. The author distinguishes between “delimitation” (which is a boundary-line) and “frontier” (which is a zone of cooperation). He also distinguishes what he calls the “national frontier” (“object of study of domestic public law”) and the “international frontier” (“object of study of international public and private law”).

Preventive Duties under Private and Public Law scilicet spei permultum sed rei paulum

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (103) ◽  
pp. 51-71
Author(s):  
Dariusz Fuchs
Keyword(s):  
Contract Law ◽  
Legal Aspects ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Civil Code ◽  
Insurance Contract ◽  
Private Law ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
Private And Public ◽  
European Insurance ◽  
The Relationship

The article aims at discussing preventive obligations incumbent on the insurer and other entities of the insurance relationship, in particular on the policyholder. The analysis takes into account comparative legal aspects, and therefore refers to the Principles of European Insurance Contract Law (PEICL). The author emphasizes the evolution of the provision of Article 826 of the Civil Code, which has changed his views on the scope of the preventive obligation under insurance contract. He points out the possible differences of interpretation as to the scope of the prevention as well as the issue of the insurer's reimbursement of costs due to its implementation by the policyholder. What is more, the relationship between public and private law standards has been presented, with a particular focus on Article 826 of the Civil Code. Finally, de lege ferenda conclusions have been presented.

scholarly journals The Covid-19 Pandemic and the Rights of the Individual in Terms of Private and Public Law

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 225-250
Author(s):  
Evgen Kharytonov ◽  
Olena Kharytonova ◽  
Denis Kolodin ◽  
Maxym Tkalych
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Optimal Algorithm ◽  
Public Law ◽  
The State ◽  
Private Law ◽  
Public Interests ◽  
Basic Principles ◽  
Private Rights ◽  
Private And Public ◽  
The Individual

The principles of adjusting the regulation of civil relations in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic are analyzed. The admissibility of restricting human rights in the context of the conflict of private and public interests are researched. Besides, the authors tried to determine the optimal algorithm of government actions aimed at preventing the spread of the epidemic. The main approach to the understanding of human rights in the article is based on Dworkin's concept of “rights as trumps”. A system of such categories as “a man”, “a private person”, “natural private rights”, “private law” and “national civil law” is analyzed. The conclusion is that the importance of the category of “natural” human rights is underestimated, which exacerbates the problem of ensuring human rights in a pandemic, when the state actively uses public law to cope with the crisis. As a result, there is a conflict of basic principles of private and public law: “everything is allowed except what is prohibited by law” vs. “only what is allowed by law is possible”. It is proposed to assume that the usual way of the legal existence of a person is that he/she acts as a participant in civil relations of a private type, even in a pandemic. Private relations, which arise during the quarantine period, are proposed to be regulated mainly by private law methods, limiting the influence of the state. This will allow us to reach a compromise of private and public interests, without restricting the rights of individuals voluntarily.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document