scholarly journals The joint owners’ grant exploitation rights to the third person on joint ownership goodsPaydaşların paylı mülkiyet konusu eşyadan üçüncü kişileri yararlandırma yetkileri

2018 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 399
Author(s):  
Zeynep Özcan
Keyword(s):  
Legal Status ◽  
Legal Aspects ◽  
English Summary ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Third Party ◽  
The Third ◽  
Third Person ◽  
Joint Ownership ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Third Person

Joint ownership, which is the most prevalent type of co-ownership, is regulated between Article 688 and Article 700 of Turkish Civil Code (hereinafter referred to as “TCC”). Joint ownership is the type of co-ownership, in which more than one person, whom have the same legal status, enjoy the property rights pro rate to their shares. Joint ownership, which is widely seen in theory and practice, has important legal aspects in terms of joint owners’ rights and authorities. Each joint owner of joint ownership has the same rights and authorities as any sole property owner had. The concept of share and joint owners’ power of disposition are significant issues within the Joint ownership. Joint owners have certain rights with respect to usufruct, management and protection of that property. Exploitation rights of such property are determined pro rata to shares hold by the joint owners . Specifically, there are certain limitations for joint owners in terms of the exploitation rights of that property. The right to grant exploitation in favor of third parties by joint owners limits the exploitation rights of other joint owners. Joint owners may grant easements to any third party on the property that subjected to Joint ownership. All joint owners should cast an affirmative vote so as to grant such easement. Besides this, each joint owner may establish any easement rights in favor of any third party upon its shares.Extended English summary is in the end of Full Text PDF (TURKISH) file. Özet             Birlikte mülkiyetin en yaygın türü olan paylı mülkiyet, TMK. m. 688 ve 700 arasında düzenlenmektedir. Paylı mülkiyet, aynı hukukî statüdeki birden fazla kişinin belirli bir eşyaya aynı anda payları oranında malik oldukları toplu mülkiyetin bir türüdür. Teori ve uygulamada sıklıkla karşılaşılan paylı mülkiyet birliği, sahiplerine tanıdığı hak ve yetkiler bakımından da önemlidir. Paylı mülkiyet birliğini oluşturan paydaşlardan her biri malikin sahip olduğu hak ve yükümlülüklere sahiptir. Paylı mülkiyette pay kavramı ve paydaşların pay üzerinde tasarruf yetkileri önemlidir. Paydaşların paylı mülkiyet konusu eşya üzerinde kullanma, yararlanma, yönetim yetkileri ve paylı mülkiyete konu eşyayı korumaya ilişkin yetkileri vardır. Bu yetkilerden, paydaşların yararlanma yetkileri pay oranlarına göre belirlenir. Özellikle de paydaşların paylı mülkiyet konusu eşyayı kullanma yetkilerine ilişkin kanuni ve iradi sınırlamalar bulunmaktadır. Paydaşların 3. kişileri paylı mülkiyet konusu eşyadan yararlandırma yetkisi onların eşyayı kullanma yetkisini sınırlandırmaktadır. Paydaşlar eşya üzerinde 3. kişi lehine irtifak hakkı kurabilirler. Bu durum paydaşların oybirliği ile karar almalarını gerektirir. Ayrıca her paydaş kendi payı üzerinde irtifak hakkı kurarak da 3. kişiye eşyadan yararlanma hakkı tanır.

The author of the Fonthill Letter

1996 ◽  
Vol 25 ◽  
pp. 91-95
Author(s):  
Mark Boynton ◽  
Susan Reynolds
Keyword(s):  
Third Party ◽  
First Person ◽  
Not Given ◽  
Anglo Saxon ◽  
The Third ◽  
Third Person ◽  
The Third Person ◽  
King Alfred

The Fonthill letter has recently been described as ‘one of the most interesting of the corpus of documents which illustrate the working of the Anglo-Saxon law’. It tells a story that is too complicated to summarize here, but the text is now readily accessible alongside a translation and wide-ranging commentary. For present purposes it may be sufficient to say that the letter was written to King Edward the Elder of Wessex (899–924) by the godfather of a troublesome character called Helmstan. The first and longest section of the letter begins with an allusion to Helmstan's theft of a belt and ends with his surrender to his godfather of five hides of land at Fonthill (Wiltshire). Helmstan gave up this land in return for his godfather's support in an oath that Helmstan had to take to defend his title to it against a third party. His godfather promised that Helmstan could continue to occupy the property for his lifetime, provided that he behaved himself. He thus held it under what was in effect a life-læn or lease. All this happened in the reign of King Alfred, some years before the letter was written. The story was told to Alfred's son and successor after the author had exchanged the Fonthill land with the bishop of Winchester and wanted the king to confirm the arrangement. The account is written in the first person but the godfather's name is not given. J. M. Kemble, however, took it that the author of the letter was a man called Ordlaf who is mentioned, in the third person, in the second section of the letter.

scholarly journals KEDUDUKAN HUKUM PERSEWAAN TANAH NEGARA

2017 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 139
Author(s):  
Iwan Permadi
Keyword(s):  
Legal Status ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
The State ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Public Land ◽  
Regional Autonomy ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Third ◽  
Secondary Data Sources ◽  
The Right

<em>This paper examines how the legal status of leasing the public land in deal with the State's Right of Controlling is and how the further regulating them in the implementation of regional autonomy is. The used method is a normative legal research with secondary data sources through primary legal materials, secondary and tertiary. The results show that leasing the land that the object is a public land constitutes an action against the law, because the state is in fact not the owner of the land. The state only has the right to control the public land and the only the owner has the right to lease the land. Therefore, there is a smuggling law in case of leasing the public land through enacting the regional regulations that contain the permit to use the public land, that the third parties can use public land but the third party must pay a sum of money.</em>

Kedudukan Hukum Persewaan Tanah Negara

2016 ◽  
pp. 139-153
Author(s):  
Iwan Permadi
Keyword(s):  
Legal Status ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
The State ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Public Land ◽  
Regional Autonomy ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Third ◽  
Secondary Data Sources ◽  
The Right

This paper examines how the legal status of leasing the public land in deal with the State's Right of Controlling is and how the further regulating them in the implementation of regional autonomy is. The used method is a normative legal research with secondary data sources through primary legal materials, secondary and tertiary. The results show that leasing the land that the object is a public land constitutes an action against the law, because the state is in fact not the owner of the land. The state only has the right to control the public land and the only the owner has the right to lease the land. Therefore, there is a smuggling law in case of leasing the public land through enacting the regional regulations that contain the permit to use the public land, that the third parties can use public land but the third party must pay a sum of money.

scholarly journals Replication and Automatic Updates of File Fragments in Cloud

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 6558-6563
Keyword(s):  
Cloud Computing ◽  
Data Security ◽  
Optimal Performance ◽  
Third Party ◽  
The Third ◽  
Third Person ◽  
Computationally Expensive ◽  
Cryptographic Techniques ◽  
The Third Person ◽  
Multiple Fragment

Generally, in cloud computing the data is outsourced to controls of third party, which may lead to issue of securitys. The data in cloud may lost because of attacks by unknown users and nodes inside the cloud .Therefore, the data within in the cloud must be kept in secured state by using different techniques .In this paper, we propose division and replication of data within in the cloud to improve optimal performance and security .In the present work we separate a file into multiple fragment sand replicate fragments on different nodes in the cloud. Each node, should store fragment only once. Therefore, no information can be get by the attacker. The node storing the fragments within the cloud are separated using a method called T-colouring, which avoids the attacker to find the location of nodes that contain related fragments. The traditional cryptographic techniques for data security are not used in this work, so that computationally expensive methodologies are reduced. The more advanced feature in this work is an automatic update of file fragments on nodes whenever any changes are done by the third person on that particular node.

scholarly journals The Third-Party Doctrine and the Third Person

2013 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 364-412
Author(s):  
Simon Stern
Keyword(s):  
Credit Card ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Reasonable Expectation ◽  
Victorian Fiction ◽  
The Third ◽  
Limited Perspective ◽  
Third Person ◽  
The Third Party ◽  
The Third Person ◽  
Reasonable Expectation Of Privacy

According to the third-party doctrine, a person has no reasonable expectation of privacy in information that has been shared with others—including a bank, phone company, or credit card company. The doctrine got its start through an appeal to a locatable observer who corresponds, in literary terms, to a narrator with a limited perspective. This is the kind of perspective that courts have traditionally emphasized when explaining how to assess probable cause. The third-party doctrine turns the limited perspective into an omniscient one. The doctrine takes apparently private conduct and classifies it as public, effectively treating the perspective of the “arresting officer” as if it could encompass large quantities of information, widely distributed in space and time. The discussion here examines a recent defense of the third-party doctrine that similarly collapses the limited and omniscient viewpoints. Then, after exploring the narrative analogy by reference to literary analyses of the omniscient narrator in Victorian fiction, the discussion ends by considering the analogy in relation to contemporary modes of omniscient narration.

Effects of Light-Hearted and Serious Entertainment on Enjoyment of the First and Third Person

2016 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 42-48 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthias Hofer
Keyword(s):  
Young People ◽  
Media Consumption ◽  
First Person ◽  
Online Experiment ◽  
Entertainment Media ◽  
Third Person Effect ◽  
The Third ◽  
Third Person ◽  
Perceived Enjoyment ◽  
The Third Person

Abstract. This was a study on the perceived enjoyment of different movie genres. In an online experiment, 176 students were randomly divided into two groups (n = 88) and asked to estimate how much they, their closest friends, and young people in general enjoyed either serious or light-hearted movies. These self–other differences in perceived enjoyment of serious or light-hearted movies were also assessed as a function of differing individual motivations underlying entertainment media consumption. The results showed a clear third-person effect for light-hearted movies and a first-person effect for serious movies. The third-person effect for light-hearted movies was moderated by level of hedonic motivation, as participants with high hedonic motivations did not perceive their own and others’ enjoyment of light-hearted films differently. However, eudaimonic motivations did not moderate first-person perceptions in the case of serious films.

Causal determinism and a totally global fatalism from the third-person perspective

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaoyang Yu
Keyword(s):  
Human Brain ◽  
Human Language ◽  
Causal Determinism ◽  
The Third ◽  
Person Perspective ◽  
Neural Substrate ◽  
Third Person ◽  
Third Person Perspective ◽  
Physical Laws ◽  
The Third Person

The human brain and the human language are precisely constructed together by evolution/genes, so that in the objective world, a human brain can tell a story to another brain in human language which describes an imagined multiplayer game; in this story, one player of the game represents the human brain itself. It’s possible that the human kind doesn’t really have a subjective world (doesn’t really have conscious experience). An individual has no control even over her choices. Her choices are controlled by the neural substrate. The neural substrate is controlled by the physical laws. So, her choices are controlled by the physical laws. So, she is powerless to do anything other than what she actually does. This is the view of fatalism. Specifically, this is the view of a totally global fatalism, where people have no control even over their choices, from the third-person perspective. And I just argued for fatalism by appeal to causal determinism. Psychologically, a third-person perspective and a new, dedicated personality state are required to bear the totally global fatalism, to avoid severe cognitive dissonance with our default first-person perspective and our original personality state.

Relaxations of Contractual Privity and the Need for Third Party Rights in Chinese Contract Law

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chen Lei
Keyword(s):  
Direct Action ◽  
Contract Law ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Chinese Law ◽  
The Third ◽  
Right Of Action ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Third Party ◽  
The Right

This chapter examines the position of third party beneficiaries in Chinese law. Article 64 of the Chinese Contract Law states that where a contract for the benefit of a third party is breached, the debtor is liable to the creditor. The author regards this as leaving unanswered the question of whether the thirdparty has a right of direct action against the debtor. One view regards the third party as having the right to sue for the benefit although this right was ultimately excluded from the law. Another view, supported by the Supreme People’s Court, is that Article 64 does not provide a right of action for a third party and merely prescribes performance in ‘incidental’ third party contracts. The third view is that there is a third party right of action in cases of ‘genuine’ third party contracts but courts are unlikely to recognize a third party action where the contract merely purports to confer a benefit on the third party.

Formation of Contract and Third Parties in Cambodia

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ly Tayseng
Keyword(s):  
Academic Writing ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Civil Code ◽  
Third Parties ◽  
Third Party ◽  
The Third ◽  
Contract Formation ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
Formal Requirements

This chapter gives an overview of the law on contract formation and third party beneficiaries in Cambodia. Much of the discussion is tentative since the new Cambodian Civil Code only entered into force from 21 December 2011 and there is little case law and academic writing fleshing out its provisions. The Code owes much to the Japanese Civil Code of 1898 and, like the latter, does not have a requirement of consideration and seldom imposes formal requirements but there are a few statutory exceptions from the principle of freedom from form. For a binding contract, the agreement of the parties is required and the offer must be made with the intention to create a legally binding obligation and becomes effective once it reaches the offeree. The new Code explicitly provides that the parties to the contract may agree to confer a right arising under the contract upon a third party. This right accrues directly from their agreement; it is not required that the third party declare its intention to accept the right.

scholarly journals Deictic Shifting in Greek Contractual Writing (I–IV AD)

Philologus ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 164 (1) ◽  
pp. 83-106
Author(s):  
Klaas Bentein
Keyword(s):  
Literary Texts ◽  
Ancient Greek ◽  
Narrative Technique ◽  
The Third ◽  
Third Person ◽  
The Third Person

AbstractMuch attention has been paid to ‘deictic shifts’ in Ancient Greek literary texts. In this article I show that similar phenomena can be found in documentary texts. Contracts in particular display unexpected shifts from the first to the third person or vice versa. Rather than constituting a narrative technique, I argue that such shifts should be related to the existence of two major types of stylization, called the ‘objective’ and the ‘subjective’ style. In objectively styled contracts, subjective intrusions may occur as a result of the scribe temporarily assuming himself to be the deictic center, whereas in subjectively styled contracts objective intrusions may occur as a result of the contracting parties dictating to the scribe, and the scribe not modifying the personal references. There are also a couple of texts which display more extensive deictic alter­nations, which suggests that generic confusion between the two major types of stylization may have played a role.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document