The Renewal of Quebec's Distinct Legal Culture: The New Civil Code of Quebec

In the period 1859-1918, Romania built and consolidated a modern law system subject to fundamental principles that were found throughout Europe, with functional mechanisms and institutions. The adoption of the major codes - the Civil Code, the Code of Civil Procedure, the Criminal Code and the Code of Criminal Procedure - during the reign of Alexandru Ioan Cuza had a cardinal importance for the national legal system. The exercise of modern legislation initiated at that time, in a rhythm which was sometimes criticized, continued through the adoption of the 1866 Constitution or through the measures of the integration of Dobrogea in the Romanian law system. On the path opened by the generation of the Union of the Principalities, Carol I strengthened the beneficial force of law, building a state in which “only the law debated and approved by the nation, decides and governs”. The science of law and legal culture had in Romania, almost six decades after the Union of the Principalities, gathered through tradition and reform, an important dowry, a true “fulfilled state of law”. In the Old Kingdom there was, at the beginning of the 20th century, a fully achieved legal system that rightly expected to be the foundation of the legal system of Greater Romania.

Download Full-text

The Feature of Droit Commun in the Disposition Preliminaire of the Civil Code of Quebec: A Clue to the Bijurality of the Legal System?

The Diffusion of Law ◽

10.4324/9781315615493-13 ◽

2016 ◽

pp. 163-184

Keyword(s):

Legal System ◽

Civil Code ◽

Civil Code Of Quebec

Download Full-text

Rights of Private Property in the Civil Code of the Russian Federation and in the Civil Code of Quebec

Review of Central and East European Law ◽

10.1163/1573035053683209 ◽

2005 ◽

Vol 30 (1) ◽

pp. 29-48 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

David Lametti

Keyword(s):

Property Rights ◽

Russian Federation ◽

Private Property ◽

General Structure ◽

Civil Code ◽

Theory And Practice ◽

General Observation ◽

Rough Approximation ◽

Civil Code Of Quebec ◽

The Russian Federation

AbstractPrivate property entails a relationship between people through objects. The objects of property rights form a necessary part of the property equation, and provide an understanding of the rights and obligations allowed and required in the exploitation of any given object. This often comes through the civilian notion of destination: the idea that certain resources have a specifi c teleology or accepted way of being properly exploited or used finds expression in various legal rules. The manner in which the destination is determined may vary: it may be formal, legal or merely tacit. This basic theme is amplified in this comparative study of the basic structure of private property rights and obligations in the Civil Code of the Russian Federation and in the Civil Code of Quebec. Other themes also become equally apparent in the course of this study. First, the Russian code contains a very rough approximation of the general structure of civil law property rights: a fullest right of ownership and different lesser entitlements or dismemberments. The dismemberments, however, are quite unique to the Russian context. Second, both property rights and obligations are articulated much more explicitly and elaborately in the Russian code than in the Quebec counterpart. Third, this express enunciation of obligations and limitations on all entitlements in turn is founded on the idea that ownership is a limited concept. This foundation is in no way in contradiction to the theory of ownership in Western legal theory and practice. Finally, as a general observation, the continuing role of the state in the Russian private property system as articulated in the Russian code is much more pronounced. This is true both in its role as a legislator and enforcement agent of property limitations, as well as its express role as an actor in certain of the lesser entitlements.

Download Full-text

La propriété spatio-temporelle

Les Cahiers de droit ◽

10.7202/042812ar ◽

2005 ◽

Vol 28 (2) ◽

pp. 261-340 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Sylvio Normand

Keyword(s):

Human Mind ◽

Civil Code ◽

Temporal Dimension ◽

Civil Code Of Quebec ◽

Estate Property ◽

Spatio Temporal ◽

Satisfactory Answer ◽

The One ◽

The Individual ◽

The Right

Ownership is one of the fundamental notions in the Civil Code and yet far too often writings on the subject have presented a narrow view of it. Obviously, its has a well determined genetic code since its general attributes are usus, fructus, abusus and vis attractiva, while its specific features include exclusivity, perpetuity and absolutism ; still it remains a pliable concept. For on the one hand, though core prerogatives remain with the holder of the right, the attributes and features of ownership may not be so well affirmed, which immediately infers the existence of modalities of the right. Yet on the other, the core may be broken down since the object to such ownership then becomes a source of real rights, thus there is dismemberment. The flexibility of ownership resides in the numerous modifications it can undergo and which all potentially exist in ownership. Before attempting to study various hypotheses leading to the recognition of spatio-temporal ownership, it is indispensible to adopt a wide view of this notion since any other approach cannot produce satisfactory results. Among hypotheses under consideration, introducing a new modality seems the best solution. It does, however, have its drawbacks as the notion of spatio-temporal ownership runs against the grain of qualities inherent in the right of ownership. First of all, the holder of this right only exercices a limited abusus and in this respect he is not alone, for precedents exist with the holders of other means of ownership (substituted property, inalienable property, trust property). Furthermore, there would be an obstruction to the perpetual nature of such ownership. This proposal is, however, to be rejected since the spatio-temporal ownership is perpetual, although discontinuous. Once the initial obstacles are overcome, the introduction of an additional modality of ownership essentially requires the recognition of a fourth dimension in the object of ownership, namely its temporality. An abstract notion if ever there was one, temporality raises the question of the need for conceiving an owned piece of property as being a concrete and materialized thing. Nonetheless, ownership may be dematerialized for in fact, real estate property can be represented as a cube of space and not just a flat plane. The only obstacle to this new modality in ownership would be the impossibility of conceiving innominate changes to the right of ownership. In all the code, case law and authoritative writings presently recognize the capacity of the human mind to conceive additional modifications to rights of ownership. Spatio-temporal ownership depends upon the recognition of the temporal dimension of the object of such right and thereby constitutes a modality of ownership whose peculiarities derive from the individual form of its object. Although recognition of modality in ownership seems to be the only way for arriving at spatio-temporal ownership, we may consider various solutions based upon an arrangement of existing institutions in the law relating to ownership —which would allow the constitution of a spatio-temporal right of ownership. Despite its popularity, usufruct does not seem to us to be a satisfactory answer. Joint ownership is more attractive despite the ever-present expectation of a petition to partition. A covenant between undivided coproprietors would provide, in our opinion however, a delay in such partition and this covenant would be enforceable on both parties and beneficiaries. If doubts persist as to the legality of such a covenant, the revision announced in the proposed Civil Code of Quebec will calm such fears. Besides allowing the postponement of partition for a maximum period of thirty years, this revision will make possible the assignment of a piece of property to a durable end and ipso facto a waiver of partition. One must remain aware of the fact that despite the technique used to avoid partition, the right ownership is plural. It is only by the identification of an additional modality of ownership that there may be true spatio-temporal ownership.

Download Full-text