scholarly journals Property Rights in Space: Moving the Goal Posts so the Players don't Notice

Author(s):  
Wian Erlank

Elsewhere in "Rethinking Terra Nullius and Property in Space", I have argued that due to the changing circumstances of access to space by private entities rather than governments, the current legal situation with regard to ownership in space should be reconsidered. As it stands, ownership in space is governed by international law and currently private and even national ownership of celestial bodies is prohibited.While (controversially) arguing for the recognition of private ownership in space, I constantly have to field questions surrounding the pragmatic assertion that since international law and United Nations treaties and conventions prohibit ownership in space, there can be no development that will allow for this. Hence, while not abandoning my purely property law-oriented arguments for recognising private ownership in and on celestial bodies, I will maintain my arguments for property rights in space and analyse a number of differing options available to private entities who would like to acquire property rights in space. As such, I purposefully avoid the maligned terminology of "ownership", and rather look at various other options that still give the intrepid celestial entrepreneur some sort of property right, or even a property-like protection of their interests in space. Some examples include concessions, mining licences, prospecting rights, and certain contractual rights that could benefit from property-like protection.The thesis is that even if ownership of celestial objects is not accepted due to the existence of various problematic dogmatic viewpoints, one would still be able to achieve much the same effect by using other property mechanisms. 

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 70
Author(s):  
Esperanza Castellanos Ruiz

Resumen: El Reglamento 650/2012 del Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo, de 4 de julio de 2012, relativo a la competencia, la ley aplicable, el reconocimiento y la ejecución de las resoluciones, a la aceptación y la ejecución de los documentos públicos en materia de sucesiones mortis causa y a la creación de un certificado sucesorio europeo ha venido a unificar las soluciones tan dispares de Derecho internacional privado que existían en el ámbito de la Unión Europea en materia sucesoria. Reconociendo el esfuerzo de los Estados miembros por coordinar la unificación de las normas de Derecho internacional privado en este área, su aplicación no está exenta de problemas con otras materias que afectan directamente a la regulación de la sucesión de una persona, como sucede, por ejemplo, con la regulación de los derechos reales que pueden afectar a los bienes de la masa hereditaria. Partiendo de que no existe una unificación de las normas de Derecho internacional privado en materia de transmisión de la propiedad de los bienes y de los derechos reales, en general, reconocidos por los distintos Estados miembros se pueden plantear muchos problemas teniendo en cuenta la existencia de un numerus clausus de derechos reales y los distintos sistemas de inscripción registral contemplados para la adquisición de tales derechos reales. Los artículos 1 y 23 del Reglamento sucesorio intentan solucionar este conflicto. Representan las dos caras de una misma moneda pues regulan el ámbito de aplicación de la lex successionis en sentido negativo y en sentido positivo, respectivamente. Por un lado, el artículo 1 recoge las cuestiones excluidas del ámbito de aplicación del Reglamento y, por otro lado, el artículo 23 recoge las cuestiones incluidas en su ámbito de aplicación. Sin embargo, la colisión se plantea en relación con la aplicación de la lex rei sitae a determinadas cuestiones sucesorias que están incluidas en el ámbito de aplicación de la lex succesionis a las que hay que aplicar cumulativamente la dos Leyes. Así, la Ley sucesoria regula la transmisión a los herederos, y en su caso, a los legatarios, de los bienes que integran la herencia, según recoge la letra e) del artículo 23.2, y las letras k) y l) del artículo 1.2, excluyen de la aplicación de la ley sucesoria la naturaleza de los derechos reales y cualquier inscripción de derechos sobre bienes muebles o inmuebles en un registro; cuestiones que, en la mayoría de los casos, quedan sometidas a la lex rei sitae o lex registrationis. Este conflicto de leyes es lo que ha provocado la primera decisión del TJUE sobre el Reglamento sucesorio: Sentencia del Tribunal de Justicia de la Unión Europea, Sala Segunda, de 12 de octubre de 2017: Kubicka.Palabras clave: Sucesión internacional, lex successionis, lex rei sitae, lex registrationis, ámbito de la ley aplicable, derechos reales, derechos de propiedad, legatum per vindicationem y per damnationem.Abstract: Regulation (EU) no. 650/2012 of the European Parliament and the Council of 4 July2012 on jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition and enforcement of decisions and acceptance and enforcement of authentic instruments in matters of succession and on the creation of a European Certificate of Succession is one of the most important results hitherto achieved for codifying private international law which the European Union. Recognizing the effort of the Member States to coordinate the unification of the rules of private international law in this area, its application is not exempt from problems with other areas that directly affect the regulation of the succession of a person, as happens for example with the regulation of property law that may affect the inheritance assets. Recognition of foreign property law may create problems in light of a Member State’s numerus clausus of property rights and differing land registration regimes. The study of the matters governed by the lex successionis, listed in article 23.2 ESR, must be done taking into account article 1.2 ESR, setting out the issues which are excluyed from the lex successionis scope. Often the exclusion or inclusion of particular matters from or within the scope of application of the lex successionis are two sides of the same coin. In other words, article 1.2 ESR governs the scope of application in a negative sense and article 23.2 ESR in a positive sense. However, the collision arises in relation to the application of the lex rei sitae to certain inheritance questions that are included in the scope of application of lex successionis to which the two Acts must be applied cumulatively. This is what happens with the regulation by lex successionis of the transfer to the heirs and, as the case may be, to the legatees of the assets, rights and obligations forming part of the estate, including the conditions and effects of the acceptance or waiver of the succession or of a legacy, according to letter e) of art. 23.2, bearing in mind that the letters k) and l) of art. 1.2, exclude from the application of the succession law the nature of rights in rem; and any recording in a register of rights in immovable or movable property, including the legal requirements for such recording, and the effects of recording or failing to record such rights in a register; issues that, in most cases, are subject to the lex rei sitae or lex registrationis. This conflict of laws is what led to the first decision of the CJEU on the Succession Regulation: Judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union, Second Chamber, of October 12, 2017: Kubicka.Keywords: International succession, lex successionis, lex rei sitae, lex registrationis, the scope of the aplicable law, rights in rem, property rights, legatum per vindicationem y per damnationem 


2005 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 95-131 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stuart Banner

The British treated Australia as terra nullius—as unowned land. Under British colonial law, aboriginal Australians had no property rights in the land, and colonization accordingly vested ownership of the entire continent in the British government. The doctrine of terra nullius remained the law in Australia throughout the colonial period, and indeed right up to 1992.


2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Inggrit Fernandes

Batik artwork is one of the treasures of the nation's cultural heritage. Batik artwork is currently experiencing rapid growth. The amount of interest and market demand for this art resulted batik artwork became one of the commodities in the country and abroad. Thus, if the batik artwork is not protected then the future can be assured of a new conflict arises in the realm of intellectual property law. Act No. 28 of 2014 on Copyright has accommodated artwork batik as one of the creations that are protected by law. So that this work of art than as a cultural heritage also have economic value for its creator. Then how the legal protection of the batik artwork yaang not registered? Does this also can be protected? While in the registration of intellectual property rights is a necessity so that it has the force of law to the work produced


Author(s):  
Ekaterina Pravilova

“Property rights” and “Russia” do not usually belong in the same sentence. Rather, our general image of the nation is of insecurity of private ownership and defenselessness in the face of the state. Many scholars have attributed Russia's long-term development problems to a failure to advance property rights for the modern age and blamed Russian intellectuals for their indifference to the issues of ownership. This book refutes this widely shared conventional wisdom and analyzes the emergence of Russian property regimes from the time of Catherine the Great through World War I and the revolutions of 1917. Most importantly, the book shows the emergence of the new practices of owning “public things” in imperial Russia and the attempts of Russian intellectuals to reconcile the security of property with the ideals of the common good. The book analyzes how the belief that certain objects—rivers, forests, minerals, historical monuments, icons, and Russian literary classics—should accede to some kind of public status developed in Russia in the mid-nineteenth century. Professional experts and liberal politicians advocated for a property reform that aimed at exempting public things from private ownership, while the tsars and the imperial government employed the rhetoric of protecting the sanctity of private property and resisted attempts at its limitation. Exploring the Russian ways of thinking about property, the book looks at problems of state reform and the formation of civil society, which, as the book argues, should be rethought as a process of constructing “the public” through the reform of property rights.


2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ralph Wilde ◽  
Hilary Charlesworth ◽  
Nico Schrijver ◽  
Nico Krisch ◽  
B. S. Chimni ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Asha Bajpai

This chapter deals with those children in especially difficult circumstances that are vulnerable, marginalized, destitute, and neglected and deprived of their basic rights. It commences with a history of the Juvenile Justice legislation in India right from the Children’s Act of 1960s to the current Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. The barriers faced in the administration and implementation of the Juvenile Justice legislation throughout its evolution to its present stage is discussed in detail. How the law deals with children in need of care and protection and children in conflict with law are discussed in this chapter. Landmark judgements by courts and suggestions for further law reform are included. This chapter also contains international law relating to administration of juvenile justice, and United Nations guidelines in matters in matters involving child victims and witnesses of crime including UN Guidelines on Alternative Care of Children. Some civil society interventions are also included.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document