scholarly journals Fund Collection through Litigation by the State Treasury in the Roman Empire (with Special Reference to the First Three Centuries A.D.)

2012 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 27-44
Author(s):  
Marzena Dyjakowska
Keyword(s):  
Roman Empire ◽  
Special Reference ◽  
Private Property ◽  
The State ◽  
Ancient Rome ◽  
Guilty Plea ◽  
The Public ◽  
Public Property

The paper discusses the confiscation of property (publicatio bonorum) as a source of revenue for the fiscus in ancient Rome. The term fiscus means, among other things, the public property, State funds, but also the private property of emperors. The confiscated property could be adjudged not only to aerarium – the State Treasury (publicare), but also to the personal treasury of emperors, and trials seem to have been inspired to supply it. The most „successful” accusation was connected with the crime of lese-majesty: the scope of this crime was especially wide and it was easy to convict the defendant. The Senate often voted for adjudgement of the confiscated property in respect of the Emperor, especially if the convict had received some benefits from him. This practice turned into a rule and the Emperor’s treasury became the sole beneficiary of publicatio bonorum. Some emperors are especially known as rulers accumulating their private property on confiscated goods (Caligula, Septimius Severus, Domitian). A portion of those goods was due to the children of the defendant; some rescripts issued by the emperors even ordered to transfer his whole property in the first place to his descendants. In spite of the rule that it was necessary to find the defendant guilty to confiscate his property, the publicatio bonorum was not available; when he committed suicide before the sentence, a presumption was made that this act was equal to a guilty plea. According to another rule – confessus pro indicato est – the defendant was convicted unless his suicide was justified. The personal belongings (pannicularia) were to be confiscated, too, but only after the conviction.

Rethinking Homeless People’s Punishments

2019 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 73-98
Author(s):  
Terry Skolnik
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Homeless People ◽  
The State ◽  
Property Right ◽  
Public Property

This article argues that we should rethink homeless people’s punishments for violating quality-of-life ordinances. Those ordinances prohibit acts that are deemed to constitute urban nuisances—urban camping, public urination, and sleeping on sidewalks among them. Violating quality-of-life ordinances can result in expensive fines, administrative fees, and civil consequences for unpaid fines. In line with other scholars’ work, this article demonstrates how our current punishment scheme entrenches individuals in homelessness and operates like a self-fulfilling prophecy. Lacking a private property right and stuck in a cycle of homelessness, homeless people will continue to alleviate their needs on public property and be subject to further coercion and punishment. Homeless people’s punishments for violating quality-of-life offenses are also objectionable because they violate three types of proportionality constraints: the gravity of the prohibited conduct, the homeless person’s moral blameworthiness, and their personal situation. This article proposes an alternate punishment scheme that minimizes the prospect of entrenchment in homelessness and remedies those three proportionality concerns. It argues that the state should adopt a day-fine model for financial penalties, implement criminal justice debt absolution frameworks, and rethink the civil and criminal consequences associated with unpaid fines. A more proportional punishment scheme is neither a solution to the reality of homelessness nor a substitute for the state’s responsibility to ensure better access to housing. However, this article’s proposals can mitigate the gravest consequences associated with homeless people’s punishments, prevent entrenchment in homelessness, and ensure homeless people are treated with greater respect.

scholarly journals TOWARDS A TAXONOMY FOR PUBLIC AND COMMON PROPERTY

2019 ◽  
Vol 78 (1) ◽  
pp. 124-147 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Rodgers
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Natural Resources ◽  
Environmental Governance ◽  
Common Property ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Effective Protection ◽  
The Public ◽  
Property Interest ◽  
Public Property ◽  
New Strategies

AbstractThis article argues that public property rights should be recognised as a separate category of property interest, different and distinct from private and common property interests and conferring distinctive rights and obligations on both “owners” and members of the public. It develops a taxonomy to differentiate private, public and common property rights. The article concludes that it is a mistake to think in terms of “private property”, “common property” or “public property”. The division and allocation of resource entitlements in land can result in private, common and public property rights subsisting over the same land simultaneously, in different combinations and at different times. The categorisation of property interests in land (as private, common or public) may also shift and change from time to time. The article considers the importance of distinguishing between private, common and public property interests for developing new strategies for environmental governance, and for implementing the effective protection of natural resources.

Edward Gibbon (1737–1794) and Early Christianity

1994 ◽  
Vol 45 (4) ◽  
pp. 661-672 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. H. C. Frend
Keyword(s):  
Roman Empire ◽  
Ancient Rome ◽  
Christian Church ◽  
The Public ◽  
History Of ◽  
Secular Society ◽  
Role Of Religion ◽  
The Church

Thus Gibbon opened the thirty-seventh chapter of the History of the decline and fall of the Roman Empire, a lengthy chapter devoted to the twin topics of ‘the institution of monastic life’ and ‘the conversion of the northern barbarians’. The connection between the history of the Roman Empire and the Christian Church was indeed indissoluble. The Church was destined to follow the pattern of the empire by gradually degenerating as it grew in strength from original purity in the life of Christ and the Apostles to become a corrupt and baleful influence on the fortunes of secular society. Looking back over twenty years of research and writing (1767–87) he wrote near the beginning of his final chapter, ‘In the preceding volumes of this History, I have described the triumph of barbarism and religion and I can only resume in a few words, their real or imaginary connection with the ruin of ancient Rome.’ He goes on to list ‘potent and forcible causes of destruction’ by barbarians and Christians respectively. As he finally laid down his pen on 27 June 1787 at Lausanne, he concluded with a sentence whose strict accuracy has sometimes been doubted: ‘It was among the ruins of the Capitol that I first conceived the idea of a work which has amused and exercised twenty years of my life, and which, however inadequate to my wishes, I finally deliver to the curiosity and candour of the public.’ The date of this decision was 15 October 1764. Here we survey briefly the role of ‘religion’, i.e. Christianity in the ruin of the Roman Empire.

scholarly journals PRIVATE PROPERTY, PUBLIC INTEREST, AND THE ROLE OF THE STATE IN NINETEENTH-CENTURY BRITAIN: THE CASE OF THE LIGHTHOUSES

2001 ◽  
Vol 44 (3) ◽  
pp. 749-771 ◽  
Author(s):  
JAMES TAYLOR
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Private Property ◽  
The State ◽  
Reform Process ◽  
Central Administration ◽  
The Public ◽  
Role Of The State ◽  
Private Profit ◽  
Post War ◽  
Privately Owned

Until 1836, many of England's lighthouses were privately owned. The owners levied tolls on all merchant shipping which made use of the lights, and in many cases grew rich from the proceeds. After 1815 these profits became increasingly contentious, and, under pressure from shipowners, merchants, and the radical MP Joseph Hume, the whig government abolished private ownership of lighthouses and made Trinity House the sole lighthouse authority for England. The choice of Trinity House as the central administration from a range of alternatives made a UK-wide authority impossible, however, due to the unwillingness of Irish and Scottish MPs to see their national boards replaced by an ‘inferior’ English one. The reform process sheds light on contemporary perceptions of the relationship between private property and public interest and suggests that alongside the process of post-war retrenchment, the state was acquiring a new role as guardian of the public interest, often positioning itself against certain forms of private property. Behind the ‘old corruption’ rhetoric which characterized the demand for reform lay the conviction that certain resources should be excluded from the realm of private property by the state, and that private profit made at the expense of the public interest was morally wrong.

Constitutional basis for public property in the context of the creation of a legal entity of public law

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (5) ◽  
pp. 134-149
Author(s):  
Vladimir Nizov
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Historical Analysis ◽  
Public Law ◽  
The State ◽  
The Public ◽  
Public Property ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Difference ◽  
The Right

The article discusses problems of the constitutional regulation of property rights and property itself. The research has been narrowed down to the features of public property regulation in the Russian Federation. The relevance of the research is explained by the process of the reform in the public property administration in Russian Federation, which has transferring of the state property to some legal entities of public law as distinguished feature. The author proposes the historical analysis of the property regulation’s development and the role of the Constitution in this process. The comparative instruments are used to show the main preconditions and trends of public property regulation in Russia and other countries. The author argues the Russian Federation is going on the process of the property regulation construction and the modern stage sees the Constitution as a main axiological filter for that. Meanwhile, the Russian legal system has several obstacles in this way: the limitation of the direct force of the Constitution, the spoiled separation of power, etc. The importance of the system of the check and balances in the property administration is noted. Thus, the research explains the differences between the system of the separation of power in the United Kingdom, Ukraine, and Russia. The author discloses the distinguishing features of the public property the state needs to account in the process of the property transition to public law entities. The critic overview of detailed property regulation in the Constitution’s text is expressed. The author notes constitutional provisions that regulate property issues are features of the post-socialist states. The difference between property rights and sovereign rights is also enclosed in the article. The justification of the right to administrate public property is provided, the research explains the importance of the justification in public property administration and its role in democratic societies, especially in the Russian Federation. The privatization and decentralization of the public property administration are needed to be explained the effectiveness and stability of these decisions. Additionally, the author argues that public property must have more concrete regulation because it needs more complex rules for just and effective administration. The conclusion of the article explains the linkage between the constitutional ideal and the development of public property regulation.

The New Unified Civil and Commercial Code and Cultural Heritage Protection in Argentina

2017 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 79-99
Author(s):  
María Luz Endere ◽  
Lucía Carolina Colombato
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Indigenous Communities ◽  
Cultural Property ◽  
The Public ◽  
Public Property ◽  
Commercial Code ◽  
Paleontological Heritage ◽  
Recent Reform ◽  
Regulatory Powers

Abstract:The recent reform of the Unified National Civil and Commercial Code will bring about significant changes in the Argentine legal system. The aim of this article is to analyze their impact in relation to the area of cultural heritage, especially in regard to the public property status of archaeological and paleontological heritage. Changes adopted—in contrast to those proposed, which referred to the issues related to indigenous communities and the protection of collective rights—are also discussed. The latter is the most innovative aspect of the reform since it involves a change of approach regarding private property and strengthens the regulatory powers of the state over private property, which might be applied to the protection of cultural property.

scholarly journals Property Law in the New Romanian Civil Code

2016 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 107-119 ◽  
Author(s):  
Szilárd Sztranyiczki
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Civil Code ◽  
Recent Change ◽  
Property Law ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
The Public ◽  
Public Property ◽  
Legal Provisions ◽  
Legal Nature

Abstract Taking into account the recent change in Romanian civil legislation, we consider the present scientific material very useful for an overview of this institution under the auspices of the New Civil Code. The national legal provisions set clear, therefore, that the property is divided into two institutions, the public property and the private property. Property classification is very important in this form for us to understand the legal nature and the applicable regime for each type of property. Moreover, the property right, either private or public, has an elite regulation in most European laws, but also in universal laws the respect for it and the guarantee of this right can be also found in the fundamental human rights, in the international treaties, and in the constitutions of different nations. We will try, therefore, to offer a brief overview of the new Romanian legislation in the mentioned field, which is already harmonized with European legislation, the result being the New Romanian Civil Code. We believe that the interpretation should be considerably more extensive, but - pragmatically - we will try to capture the main theoretical and practical features to denote the importance of this institution.

scholarly journals FAŁSZOWANIE OZNACZEŃ AUTORSTWA W STAROŻYTNYM RZYMIE A USTAWA ‘LEX CORNELIADE FALSIS’

2016 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 149
Author(s):  
Katarzyna Kręźlewicz
Keyword(s):  
Roman Empire ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
First Century ◽  
Roman Law ◽  
Ancient Rome ◽  
Weights And Measures ◽  
The Public ◽  
False Identity ◽  
Modern Sense

FALSE DESIGNATION OF AUTHORSHIP IN ANCIENT ROME AND THE LEX CORNELIA DE FALSIsSummaryThe lex Cornelia testamentaria nummaria, later known as the lex Cornelia de falsis, was the first Roman comprehensive anti-fraud law. Initially its scope only covered forged wills and counterfeit coinage. In the early first century AD other documents were given legal protection under criminal law against forgery. Later Roman anti-fraud laws were expanded to cover cases of falsifying documents, making false statements, corrupting judges, and adulterating and using adulterated weights and measures. There was no legal definition in ancient Rome of the trademark in the modern sense, but craftsmen’s stamps and workshop marks, which had been in use since time immemorial and were an indispensable appurtenance associated with the expansion of the Roman Empire and the growth of its trade, played a similar role. The use of false or forged designations could presumably be treated as analogous to the use of a false identity, which was punishable by the poena legis Corneliae. However, there are no Roman law sources showing evidence of protection for this kind of designation. Presumably there was a need for craftsmen’s marks to inform buyers about a product’s origin and features. Yet the real purpose of those descriptions was to protect the interests of the craftsman or producer, while the protection of his customers was more of an indirect effect. There are no sources to unequivocally confirm the punishability of counterfeiting craftsmen’s marks and the treatment of the phenomenon as fraud. The Roman legislator did not perceive the use of forged designations as a violation of the public good, but rather only as a risk which individual craftsmen or producers had to reckon with. The lex Cornelia penalised conduct that could affect the interest of the public and state. In the opinion of the Roman legislator false authorship only violated the interest of the producer concerned.

How Local Waters Become State Water

2018 ◽  
pp. 11-31
Author(s):  
Eric P. Perramond
Keyword(s):  
New Mexico ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Water Rights ◽  
The State ◽  
Private Property Rights ◽  
The Public ◽  
Water Users ◽  
State Water ◽  
Access Rights ◽  
Local Water

New Mexico, like most western U.S. states, relies on the legal assumptions of prior appropriation to sort out historical water rights in space and in time. Early in the twentieth century, the state redefined water as owned by the public, but access rights to water were assigned as private property rights. Water rights adjudications are designed to identify water users throughout the state and quantify their water allocation. This process fundamentally rescaled water as an object and a property and was at odds with existing local water cultures and definitions of water. Local and indigenous water sovereigns contested the state’s reading of water as property, and adjudication dragged on for decades in valleys where local interests wanted water to remain with their lands.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document