1/36
Looks like no tags are added yet.
Name | Mastery | Learn | Test | Matching | Spaced |
---|
No study sessions yet.
res mobiles vs. res immobiles
movables have usucaption period of 2 years
immobiles have usucaption period of 1 year
res mancipi vs. res nec mancipi
res mancipi —> slaves, beasts of burden, Italic Land, praedial servitudes
requires formal conveyance through mancipati/in iure cessio
res nec mancipi —> conveyance satisfied throuh delivery
distinction eroded by “bonitary ownership”
res corpoales vs. res incorporales
distinction between physical and abstract things
possession
said to exist as a “fact” and is determined by mental + physical elements
must have exclusive right to hold —> no possession under contract or iure re aliena
exception for pledge-creditors + sequesters (possession required)
intention for possession
must have intention to possess + actually physically control
mere intention is sufficient to retain possession
bonitary owner
possessor whose title is merely formally defective
can use actio publiciana to fictitiously complete usucaption and vindicate against everyone
apply defence of “thing sold & delivered” in response to owner’s defence
bona fide possessor
possessor whose title is substantially defective
can use actio publiciana to fictitiously complete usucaption and vindicate against everyone but owner
original natural modes of acquisition
occupatio
alluvio
accessio
specificatio
fruits
thesaurus
occupatio
acquiring ownership of something that has no owner —> ownership acquired through possession
wild animals are considered in possession until you lose sight of it OR has a habit of returning
alluvio
river creates new land incrementally —> generally belongs to owner of the riverbank
creation of islands is split in the middle by both riparian owners or whose ever side is closer (insula nata)
exposed riverbed becomes property of riverbank owner or split among closest owners (alveus derelictus)
accessio
one thing accedes to another to create a new thing
if new thing is the same —> joint ownership
if not, owner of more valuable constituent takes ownership of the whole
specificatio
two things united in a way that creates an entirely new thing
Sabinians —> ownership belongs to owner of materials, or joint ownership in proportion to contribution
Proculians —> ownership belongs to the maker
Justinian’s media sententia —> ownership to the maker IF materials cannot be restored to original state OR he contributed any part
fruits
tenants have right from landlord to gather fruits w/ consent (perceptio)
usufructuaries have right to the fruits he collects
bona fide possessor —> acquires all fruits collected in good faith (by anyone)
Justinian —> liable for to account for fruits to owner except for those consumed in good faith
thesaurus
entitled to 100% of treasure found on your own land, 50/50 with actual owner of land if found by chance
474 Constitution —> if not found by chance, landowner gets 100%
Thomas on specificatio
Proculian and Sabinian positions on specificatio are not the result of philosophy (Aristotelianism vs. Stoicisim) —> reflect pragmatic choices
Proculian position —> default focus on form due to practicality
Sabinians —> hire contracts meant buyer who owned materials owned final product
Rodger on babies of a slave women and fruits
jurists disagreed on whether the child of a slave women under a usufruct would belong to the usufructuary or owner
Publius Scaveola + Manus Manilius —> baby slave is a fruit
Marcus Brutus + Ulpian —> human cannot the be the fruit of another human being
Birks —> reasoning is “overkill”, how do we justify baby slaves belonging to the owner?
Ulpian —> generally a good idea to buy a slave woman with the intention of birthing children
something that increases the estate naturally belongs to the estate
formal modes of conveyance
mancipati
in iure cessio
traditio
mancipati
formal mode of conveyance for corporeal things —> required 6 citizen witnesses and formal stipulation
in iure cessio
conveying incorporeal things + res mancipi
involved transfer of rights in a fictitious trial
fell out of practice by Justinian’s time
traditio
delivery based on a valid ground (iusta causa)
Classical Law —> common intention to transfer ownership + common mind for cause of benefit
Justinian Law —> common intention to transfer ownership was sufficient
three types:
i] traditio longa manu
ii] traditio brevi manu
iii] constitutum possessorium
traditio longa manu
long-handed delivery of movables
Justinian law removed necessity of visible transfer of object
i.e. Gaius —> “delivering” goods of a warehouse would have to take place at the warehouse
traditio brevi manu
delivery where corpus comes before animus
i.e. lend you a book and sell after
constitutum possesorium
delivery where no corpus occurs (i.e. sale of a book but retention on loan —> possession and ownership passes without physical transfer)
requires definite transaction that allows for possession/ownership to pass
Gordon on Traditio
unclear if ownership via traditio automatically grants possession
Nicosia —> yes
Watson —> no (traditio to a pupil)
master could acquire ownership via traditio without possession through a slave
Daube on traditio and occupatio
ownership of abandoned property is construed as a form of traditio incertae personae —> reflects shift to formalized transactions
applied when someone would throw coins into a crowd
applied in Gaius’s analysis of debtor “abandoning” valuable objects to his friends —> treated as a traditio and thus a fraud on creditors
Proculians —> owner of abandoned property ceased to be owner when someone else took possession
usucapio (acquisitive prescription)
possession of 2 years (immovables) or 1 year (movables) leads to ownership on 5 conditions:
1] uninterrupted possession for requisite period
2] acquired ex iusta causa —> transaction where possessor would be owner but for some defect
3] acquired in good faith
4] thing must be capable of being owned
5] thing must not have been stolen or take by force at any time
Justinian introduced longissimi temporaes prescription —> good faith possessor becomes owner after 30 years
iure in re aliena
rights in rem over another person’s property —> 5 types:
i] praedial servitudes
ii] personal servitudes
iii] emphyteusis
iv] superficies
v] securities
pradeial servitudes
right in rem over an adjacent plot of land/building —> burden must “run” with neighbour + benefit must “run “ with your land
only capable of creating a negative duty, not a positive one (exception for building support, positive duty to repair)
divided into rustic & urban servitude
rustic servitudes were res mancipi (right of way/water)
urban servitudes were res nec mancipi (right of light)
personal servitude
vests in an individual and are personal + inalienable, 4 types:
i] usufruct
ii] usus —> right to use but no fruits
iii] habitatio —> usus for houses
iv] operae servorum —> usus for slaves
usufruct
right to use and take fruit/profits of another’s property without alteration
quasi-usufruct exists for consumable goods —> obligation to return equivalent quantity/quality
fruits of a slave —> only applied to affairs connected with the usufruct + work done with usufruct’s property
emphyteusis
grant of state/municipal land for long period of time in exchange for rent
holder’s right was inheritable + alienable
perpetual action in rem on the land —> lost if he died intestate, didn’t pay rent or inflicted irremediable damage
expanded to private landowners by combination with Greek practice of agor vectalis
superficies
rights in rem for a building
inheritable, alienable + lasting for a long time
real security
real security would grant a creditor rights in contract + property over debtor
originally —> conveyance subject to covenant (fiducia) for reconveyance on payment of debt
pignus
landlord could receive a bare ius in re aliena in a tenant’s property to secure rent
actio serviana allowed landlord to reclaim possession if tenant didn’t pay the rent
hypotheca
non-possessory charge over a security —> no right to property, but preferential right to have debt paid out of property
Buckland on servitudes
a servitude-holder/usufructuary held a vindicatio to prevent interference with their right
some argue that vindicatio was only available against the owner
separate actio negativa ex diverso adversario was necessary to deal with 3rd parties (Biondi)
actio negativa assumes plaintiff denies the defendant’s right —> no inconsistency for two rights in a praedium to exist
Buckland on usufructs
unclear if usufruct is a pars dominii or separate legal right
Pampaloni —> usufruct is a pars dominii of a specific type since a usufruct that is combined into owner’s property still exists
Buckland —> merging of a usufruct and ownership will extinguish the usufruct