The Numerus Clausus Issue in Property Law – European Private Law and the Polish Perspective

2020 ◽  
Vol 82 ◽  
pp. 211-226
Author(s):  
Magdalena Ossowska

The numerus clausus of property rights indicates that a mandatory closed catalogue of property rights exists in a given legal system; the content (method of creation, conveyance, expiration) of a right falling within this closed list is strictly specified and cannot be changed by the parties. In this way, the state consciously limits the activity of the parties in this regard, indicating the socially and legally acceptable types of property rights they can use. An insightful look at the development and explanation of this principle over the centuries and now seems to be necessary with the advancing unification of private law in Europe. The present article discusses the dogmatic basis of the concept of numerus clausus and outlines its history and economic reasoning behind it. Then, the main models of the numerus clausus in European legal orders as well as the functioning of this principle in Polish property law are presented. Subsequently, the strengths and weaknesses of the numerus clausus are examined. This provides us with general conclusions concerning the harmonization of this area of private law.

Author(s):  
J. E. Penner

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.


2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 64-101 ◽  
Author(s):  
J.G. Allen

Abstract Digital coins have burst into mainstream awareness recently, mainly as a result of high-worth ‘Initial Coin Offerings’ (‘ICOs’). The most immediate question in the legal treatment of digital coins is whether they are properly seen as digital ‘commodities’, and/or as ‘securities’, and/or as units of ‘money’. But the conceptual underpinnings of these categories are not clear, nor is it clear how these categories relate to each other; no legal system currently deals adequately with incorporeal objects as objects of property law. This category includes not only digital coins but also some forms of conventional money and securities. Establishing a satisfactory account of their treatment in property law is therefore a necessary first step to incorporating digital coins into private law theory. I argue that this task is best approached on the basis of a plausible ontology of incorporeal objects, including those embodied in paper (i.e. banknotes and conventional securities) and those that exist natively in ‘cyberspace’ (i.e. electronic ‘book-money’, modern securities, and now digital coins). We therefore urgently need to develop a plausible account of a how packets of data can be treated as an object of property rights. Using a comparative analysis of English law and Civilian law (particularly German) concepts of property as an entry point into this complex of problems, I explore the ontology of incorporeal objects and the role of documentation in their creation and maintenance as part of the ‘ontic furniture’ of our economic world. I explore the conceptual basis of property in digital coins in terms of a new category of property. Such a category is long overdue and will be increasingly important in the future.


2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 269-273
Author(s):  
G. Toktogonova ◽  
M. Karimova

The article considers the relevance of comparative law as a science and method that contribute to the development of law on the territory of the state and international private law relations. The article describes the importance of comparative law for legal education in the modern legal life of the Kyrgyz Republic. The article examines the contribution of comparative law to the improvement of the national legal system of the Kyrgyz Republic. The article considers the importance of comparative law in creating favorable conditions for fruitful cooperation of lawyers from different countries.


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 


Author(s):  
Marcelo Schultes

Resumo: A principal questão deste estudo é que, no ambiente de integração econômica da União Europeia, para que se perfectibilize o mercado interno, faz-se necessário o tratamento integrado da propriedade industrial no território do tratado, que pode ser caracterizado como a centralização de procedimentos e alargamento da validade dos títulos de propriedade industrial no espaço da União Europeia. As necessidades econômicas do mercado interno no espaço de integração demandam trazer à competência da União matérias antes tratadas nacionalmente pelos estados membros, notadamente quando se fala em temas de direito privado. A propriedade industrial é um bom exemplo disso, e o legislador europeu está paulatinamente trazendo a regulação desta matéria para dentro do ordenamento da União. Palavras Chave: União Europeia; Propriedade Industrial; Direito Privado; Alargamento; Marcas; Patentes; Design. Abstract: The main question on this study is that, in the regional integration environment of the European Union, for the internal market to get perfectibilized, it is necessary the integrated treatment of industrial property rights in the territory of the treaty, which can be characterized as the centralization of procedures and enlargement of the territorial validity of the industrial property rights in the European Union. The economic needs of the internal market in the integration territory demand to bring to the European Union's competence the matters originally treated nationally by the member states, especially when it comes to private law. Intellectual property is a good example of it, and the European legislator is gradually bringing the regulation of this matter into the legal system of the European Union. Keywords: European Union; Industrial Property; Private Law; Marks; Patents; Design.


2005 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 399-425 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Demers

Transfers of shares in the private law of the Province of Quebec raise numerous questions. The rights of the bona fide transferee for value are not clearly settled by the Civil Code and the provincial Companies Act is silent on the issue. In the first part of this article, the author deals with the state of the civil law on the question, illustrating the discussion with a study of the rights of a minor to proceed against bona fide transferees generally and more specifically, under articles 297 and 1487 C.C. In the second part of the article, the question is viewed from the point of view of the federal legislation. Part VI of the Canada Business Corporations Act is studied in detail in so far as the rights of the minor are modified by the statute. This useful exercise indicates clearly the preference given by the federal Act to bona fide purchasers of securities and the rather precarious position of the true owner in questions of conflicting claims. Viewed from a larger perspective, this study reveals an important trend in recent legislative enactments : where traditional rules tend to protect property rights (nemo dat...), contemporary legislations seem to favour unduly the security of commercial transactions.


Author(s):  
J. E Penner

This chapter concerns the justification of property rights, and makes the argument that we do have ‘natural’ or ‘pre-legal’ rights to the use of things, a kind of usufructory right. The Kantian theory of property rights, most thoroughly and convincingly developed by Arthur Ripstein is discussed in detail. Various aspects of the theory are criticized, in particular Kant’s view of right to appropriate unowned things and his famous ‘assurance’ argument. In explaining his differences with the Kantian theory, the author expounds what has been called an ‘instrumentalist’ view of law in general and property law in particular, a view most closely associated with the private law writings of John Gardner.


Global Jurist ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ilaria Amelia Caggiano

The work considers money in a different way depending on whether it is used as a means of payment or for other functions. Only in the first case it comes to evidence a characteristic proprietary regime which cuts across the different categories of property by which money assets are represented. In the other cases, money should be considered simply as a fungible asset. However, rules of specification of fungibles should be reconsidered. Specifically, the paper deals with the issues arising in transactions where money is transferred to an intermediary for management. It aims to show that the transferor or the beneficiary keeps real interests in the money transferred. It argues how these interests may be relevant to Italian law, by comparing it with the English legal system. The paper demonstrates that reference to property law may be useful for evaluating the quantum of rights of the transferor of money by referring to the concept of value and by the analysis of law of mixtures under the Italian and the English law. The analysis is worked out in terms of corporeal money but argues that law reaches equivalent outcomes for incorporeal money in the field under consideration.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document