scholarly journals On the structure and methodological criteria of the doctrine of property rights in Russian civil law

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 11-13
Author(s):  
E.A. Karpov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Property Law ◽  
Present Stage ◽  
Methodological Criterion ◽  
Modern Period ◽  
Revolutionary Period

The article examines the formation of methodological criteria for the doctrine of property law and its structure. The author reveals the very concept of the methodological criterion of the doctrine, analyzes various criteria of the doctrine of property law in the pre-revolutionary period. Soviet and modern period. The author notes the lack of a clear methodological criterion for the doctrine of property law at the present stage.

scholarly journals Establishment of things

2006 ◽  
Vol 78 (9) ◽  
pp. 413-441
Author(s):  
Janko Kubinjec
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Property Law ◽  
Human Relationship ◽  
Legal Concept ◽  
Legal Definition ◽  
The Law ◽  
Definition Of

Legal concept of person is to be constituted, while the legal concept of thing is to be established. Legal concept of thing is a metaphysical category that shall be differentiated from the positive-legal definition of thing as an empirical phenomenon, as well from the natural thing, which is also as an empirical phenomenon. Legal concept of thing is a spiritual phenomenon, which belongs to the field of objective spirit. The thing is the basis for the entire civil law. The wrong conclusion that civil law starts with ownership and ownership with possession, is based on the so called naturalistic error. For the title, the thing is primarily a freedom for the person, while the mortgage is the border with which the owner is confronted. At the point where freedom overflows from person to thing we have erga omnes effect of property rights. It is not possible to clearly and materially differentiate person from the thing without defining the law as the freedom, and without making this distinction, the persons can also be defined as res cogitans. In the property law, the essence is manifested through the human relationship. In the law of the contracts and torts the thing is neglected up to the point where we come to property, and point where property becomes the claim. If, in addition to that, directly natural refutation of things is produced, we are faced with the legal concept of damages. In the authentic law, the succession is always the concept pertaining to things and only in the non authentic law it may be the concept pertaining to persons.

scholarly journals Civil legal aspects of the recodification of intellectual property rights

2020 ◽  
Vol 168 ◽  
pp. 00023
Author(s):  
Ievgeniia Bulat ◽  
Roman Pichko
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Legal Aspects ◽  
Present Stage ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
Industrial Chemical ◽  
Definition Of

At the present stage those questions are especially relevant that are connected with civil legislation and intellectual property institution recodification. Intellectual property covers all fields of activity, in particular, agro-industrial, chemical, mining and other industries. The article defines that in Ukraine the necessity of civil legislation recodification includes the ridding of all explicit collisions. Also, it includes the implementation of the world’s best experience in civil relations regulation and its stability and in definition of the direction of the further normative and legislative development. The main directions of recodification of the Institute of Intellectual Property as one of the key civil law institutions of Ukraine are identified in the context of the article. The directions of improvement of legal norms, guaranteeing the inviolability of intellectual property rights, providing them with greater juridical security and their further rationalization are also determined in the context of the article.

PERLINDUNGAN HUKUM TERHADAP KARYA SENI BATIK YANG BELUM TERDAFTAR MENURUT UNDANG-UNDANG NOMOR 28 TAHUN 2014 TENTANG HAK CIPTA

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Inggrit Fernandes
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Rapid Growth ◽  
Economic Value ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Property Law ◽  
Market Demand ◽  
Work Of Art

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

Property

2020 ◽  
pp. 276-292
Author(s):  
J. E. Penner
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Property Law ◽  
Private Law ◽  
Making Sense ◽  
The Social ◽  
Bundle Of Rights ◽  
High Level

This chapter discusses property law. It considers the idea that property had a “nominalist” ontology, and it was in danger of “disintegration” as a working legal category for that very reason. Nominalism about property has had a significant impact in U.S. case law. The concern here, however, is whether it is a helpful stance to take as a theorist of property. The chapter argues that it is not. There are indeed “high” level abstractions about property which one cannot plausibly do without if one is to understand property rights and property law doctrine. Moreover, the “bundle of rights” (BOR) challenge does not assist one in making sense of these abstractions. The chapter then looks at the conceptual failure of BOR and the New Private Law as it relates to property. BOR is generally regarded as being underpinned by what might be called the Hohfeld-Honoré synthesis. The synthesis rests upon a fairly serious mistake, which is that while the Hohfeldian examination of jural norms is analytic if it is anything, Honor’s elaboration of the incidents making up ownership is anything but—it is functional. This means that Honoré describes the situation of the owner not principally in terms of his Hohfeldian powers, duties, and rights vis-à-vis others, but in terms of the social or economic advantages that an owner has by virtue of his position, and the terms and limitations of those advantages.

Property and Expropriation: Two Concepts Revisited in the Light of the Case Law of the European Court of Human Rights and the European Court of Justice

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 172-191
Author(s):  
Sabrina Praduroux
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Economic Value ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Property Law ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Key Concepts ◽  
Domestic Law

Abstract In the late 1950 s René Savatier foretold that the qualification of economic value itself as property (bien) would have been the ultimate evolution of the theory of property rights. This prediction has come true with regard to the case law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and the European Court of Justice (CJEU). This paper investigates the implications of the understanding of property developed by the two European Courts on the concept of expropriation itself as well as for the principles governing expropriation law. Hence, the paper illustrates the role played by both the ECtHR and the CJEU in laying down the parameters of legitimacy for national law, including property law. Within this context, the focus falls on cases in which the Courts characterize the facts as deprivation of property requiring for compensation, even though the relevant property could not be the object of expropriation under the domestic law of the defendant State. My contribution brings new insights into the current transformation of the traditional property categories and suggests the reinterpretation of some key concepts of expropriation law.

scholarly journals Creation of Technical Conditions for Use or Infringement – The Meanders of the Warehouse Keeper’s Liability in Light of CJEU Judgment C-567/18 Coty Germany

2021 ◽  
Vol 52 (3) ◽  
pp. 265-282
Author(s):  
Krystyna Szczepanowska-Kozłowska
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Literal Meaning ◽  
Property Right ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Property Law ◽  
Industrial Property ◽  
The Absolute ◽  
The Law ◽  
Trademark Use

AbstractOne form of industrial property right infringement is stocking for the purpose of offering or marketing. This form of infringement appears both in EU legal acts on trademarks or designs, as well as in national regulations, including those concerning patents. What is specific to stocking when compared to other activities comprising the stipulated exclusivity of the holder of industrial property rights is the fact that the literal meaning of “stocking” does not explain whether the infringing party or the warehouse keeper is the entity that places the goods in storage. The structure of industrial property rights as absolute rights would theoretically permit the view that the law is violated by both the entity that accepts the goods for storage and the entity that places such goods in storage. To determine if there is an infringement, it must be established what the goods being stocked are further intended for. It is not without significance that the finding of an infringement of industrial property rights does not depend on fault or awareness. From the point of view of the industrial property law regime, it is difficult to find arguments against this understanding of infringement by stocking. Since the offeror of goods infringing industrial property rights may be held liable even if the goods have not yet been manufactured, it is conceivable that the entity accepting such goods for stocking is also liable. This interpretation of the concept of stocking would certainly correspond to the absolute nature of liability for infringement.In a recent judgment the CJEU confirmed that the warehouse keeper who, on behalf of a third party, stores goods which infringe trademark rights only creates the technical conditions for trademark use by this third party provided that the warehouse keeper is not aware of that infringement. The CJEU also confirmed that only the person who decides about the purpose of storing the goods can be treated as an infringer. However, the CJEU did not respond to the question regarding whether the warehouse keeper could be treated as an infringer if it pursues the aims of storing the goods at the request of the entity that put the goods into storage.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document