The Compatibility of Absolute Property Right in Liberal State: A Critique of Locke and Blackstone

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Siddik Rabiyath
Ekonomia ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 55-66
Author(s):  
Jonasz Suchy

Is legal estate in land still legal according to Polish law?The aim of the article is to investigate the possibility of implementing Murray Rothbard’s concept of absolute property right in Polish civil procedure. The historical background of this reflection is the time of dispossessions and the policies undertaken by the Polish communist government toward rightful owners of immovable property living in post-war Warsaw. The process of dispossessions was based on the edict imposed by the president of Poland at that time, Bolesław Bierut. Therefore, another aim of the study is to examine the results of Bierut’s edict, including its substantive and procedural legal effects. Furthermore, the article has shown the advantages of primal ownership rule as a fundamental and arbitrary title to being an owner of real estate as the non-aggression principle would be restored. By taking these assumptions under consideration, the author wants to highlight that the undertaken dispossessions were lawless in the normative as well as ethical view. The logical consequence of the abovementioned philosophy is the thesis that the attitude toward this issue of recent Polish governments, which have not done anything to enable legal owners to get their ownerships back from the state, could not be tolerated as it was also unlawful. Moreover, if the Polish government had acted according to the law, the rightful owners of dispossessed legal estate would have received a convenient way to regain their property as well an opportunity to demand payment and compensation.By referring to the concept of absolute property right, the author wishes to indicate that each act of dispossession undertaken by using governmental force was unlawful as it could not be justified by ethical rules of natural law. It has also been concluded that it would be worth deliberating the implementation into Polish civil procedure of an institution which would allow owners who had lost their ownership to regain their right to property. Such proceedings would remain valid not just inter partes between the parties but also erga omnes toward all.The article is also supplemented with a reflection of the economic effects of Bierut’s edict while taking into consideration the policy’s influence upon the possibility of conducting a rational economic calculation.


2018 ◽  
pp. 143-155
Author(s):  
Sindhu Thulaseedharan

In India, the familial relations of any citizen, including inheritance, are governed by law related to his or her religion, which came to be known as personal law. The property rights of Hindu woman from the vedic age refl ected that daughter was given a share equal to that of a son, who in the later age of smritis ( traditional law) , came to inherit only in the absence of male issue. The nature of property of a Hindu woman, stridhanam (woman’s property) thus came to be distorted from absolute property right to ‘limited estate’ known as ‘woman’s estate’. That is, the property passed only to the next heirs of the last male owner of the female intestate. The legislations in the pre-independent India strengthened the position of Hindu woman. But the later laws limited her interest in property to the sense that she could alienate it for certain purposes only and the property possessed by her devolved on the heirs of her husband and not on her own heirs. The retention of testamentary power has further undermined gender-equality largely. Even at present, the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005, allows existing property disputes to continue and does not affect rights that became vested prior to its implementation. Therefore, the codifi cation of personal law on succession becomes the need of the hour, since the patriarchal norms retained in the law have to be dropped.


Author(s):  
Myroslava Hudyma ◽  

Within the framework of the general doctrine of constitutive and translational acquisition of rights, the publication made an attempt to identify their suitability for describing the phenomenon of ownership transfer. The general characteristics of translational and constitutive acquisition of rights are analyzed, their differences are highlighted, and it is emphasized that the specified types can cover such legal situations as full transfer of the right (the right as a whole), and transfer of a part of powers (as components of the certain right). The paper underlines that the differences between the types of acquisition of rights are not so much quantitative (one jurisdiction or their complex is transferred), as qualitative characteristics and such issues are especially relevant in the spectrum of research on the transfer of ownership as a right that includes a triad of powers. Close attention is paid to the construction of constitutive acquisition of right, the possibility of use of which is extremely controversial, due to the overwhelming denial of the correctness of separation and alienation of a separate authority from ownership right, because the approval of the latter will lead to theoretical dissonance on the existence of incomplete (split ownership). It is emphasized that the application of the construction of the transfer of authority can take place in different shades of meaning and be combined with the right alienation, and without it. Therefore, the construction of right granting without alienation of the right is quite viable. Moreover, the transfer of one or even several powers of the owner is not only practically possible, but also necessary to establish limited property rights on the basis of full property right (ownership right). However, it is noted that in these cases, the acquirer will not receive the right of the alienator as a whole, but only certain legal possibilities of behavior in relation to a particular good. The legal capacity of the acquirer will not coincide with the legal capabilities of the alienator in content and scope, and therefore to talk about the transfer of ownership is incorrect, only a certain authority (powers) of the owner will be transferred, provided its (their) separation admissibility. The paper concludes that the specifics of property rights, which forms a triad of indivisible powers, determines the possibility of applying the construction «transfer of ownership» only to cases of translational acquisition of right, in which the acquirer receives a right identical to the right of the grantor both in content and volume.


Agrotek ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mecky Sagrim

Aim of the research as follows: (1) inquisitive about variation of laws in regulating agrarian resources use, (2) function of traditional law in regulation at used of natural resources and related with existence on natural preservation-in formal law, and (3) inquiring influence outsider intervention to local institutions with the agrarian structure and relationship between expectation agrarian conflict. The unity of the study is Arfak community-as much as local community- was that administrative limited seatle in certain locations around natural preservation area of the Arfak Mountain. The trategy of the research is case study, while analysis of the data with qualitative manner. Result of the research is in the locations study beside property right of local community and movement of Arfak community from high land include at the resettlement programme. Not a problem related with economic subsistence with economic un-security because group property right community give free to the movement community for use to agriculture developing. For developing concept of forest sustainable as nit side to one side, income several NGO as well as role as institution relationship (young-shoot autonomy) for accommodation importance various party supra-village in relationship with existence natural preservation area of the Arfak Mountain and the party of local community in related of security in economic subsistence.


Author(s):  
Markus D. Dubber

Dual Penal State: The Crisis of Criminal Law in Comparative-Historical Perspective addresses one of today’s most pressing social and political issues: the rampant, at best haphazard, and ever-expanding use of penal power by states ostensibly committed to the enlightenment-based legal-political project of Western liberal democracy. Penal regimes in these states operate in a wide field of ill-considered and little constrained violence, where radical and prolonged interference with the autonomy of the very persons upon whose autonomy the legitimacy of state power is supposed to rest has been utterly normalized. At bottom, this crisis of modern penality is a crisis of the liberal project itself; the penal paradox is merely the sharpest formulation of the general paradox of power in a liberal state: the legitimacy of state sovereignty in the name of personal autonomy. To capture the depth and range of the crisis of contemporary penality in ostensibly liberal states, Dual Penal State leaves behind customary temporal and parochial constraints, and turns to historical and comparative analysis instead. This approach reveals a fundamental distinction between two conceptions of penal power, penal law and penal police, that run through Western legal-political history, one rooted in autonomy, equality, and interpersonal respect, and the other in heteronomy, hierarchy, and patriarchal power. Dual penal state analysis illuminates how this distinction manifests itself in the history of the present of various penal systems, from the malign neglect of the American war on crime to the ahistorical self-satisfaction of German criminal law science.


Author(s):  
Aruna Nair

This chapter examines the law governing the availability of claims to traceable proceeds. It argues that the language used in the case law—which uses the terminology of property rights and of fiduciary relationships—cannot fully explain the law, since such claims are often available in the absence of fiduciary duties and are not available to holders of many types of property right. It argues that such claims instead presuppose a relationship of ‘control of assets’: where the defendant has a legal power to deal with some asset, correlating to a vulnerability to a loss of rights in that asset on the part of the claimant, and coupled with a duty not to exercise the power. It argues that relationships that have this formal structure also share normative characteristics that justify the subordination of defendant autonomy that has been shown to be at the heart of the tracing concept.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document