Acquisitive Prescription of Artwork and Other High-Value Movables: A Comparative Case Study of Litigation and Legislation in Louisiana, Germany, and Russia

IF 1.3 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW American Journal of Comparative Law Pub Date : 2023-03-01 DOI:10.1093/ajcl/avad020
Markus G Puder, Anton D Rudokvas
{"title":"Acquisitive Prescription of Artwork and Other High-Value Movables: A Comparative Case Study of Litigation and Legislation in Louisiana, Germany, and Russia","authors":"Markus G Puder, Anton D Rudokvas","doi":"10.1093/ajcl/avad020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Using artwork and other valuables as a high-stakes case study, the Article discusses the law governing acquisitive prescription of movable property in Louisiana, Germany, and Russia. Rather than merely depicting what the law is from the perspective of a legal system’s respective silo, the Article develops a unique screen of test questions that have been intensely discussed by the courts and literature of the three sample jurisdictions when confronting prescription cases. What barriers, if any, does a jurisdiction erect with regard to the operations of prescription law? How are evidentiary burdens allocated with regard to good faith? Does the jurisdiction recognize tolling doctrines that do not reside in legislated law? What is the relationship between prescription and unjust enrichment? Controversies over art work and other high-value movables have inserted a powerful dose of drama into the discussion of these topics, which would have otherwise not received much attention in the public space. The Article concludes with the diagnosis that prescription law, one of property law’s core staples, is a fertile area of scholarly research with a particularly rich comparative yield. Louisiana, Germany and Russia differ widely as to the designs and operations of their prescription laws, which ultimately reflects distinct policies with regard to balancing the protection of ownership with the transformative effects of possession over time.","PeriodicalId":51579,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Comparative Law","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Comparative Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcl/avad020","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Using artwork and other valuables as a high-stakes case study, the Article discusses the law governing acquisitive prescription of movable property in Louisiana, Germany, and Russia. Rather than merely depicting what the law is from the perspective of a legal system’s respective silo, the Article develops a unique screen of test questions that have been intensely discussed by the courts and literature of the three sample jurisdictions when confronting prescription cases. What barriers, if any, does a jurisdiction erect with regard to the operations of prescription law? How are evidentiary burdens allocated with regard to good faith? Does the jurisdiction recognize tolling doctrines that do not reside in legislated law? What is the relationship between prescription and unjust enrichment? Controversies over art work and other high-value movables have inserted a powerful dose of drama into the discussion of these topics, which would have otherwise not received much attention in the public space. The Article concludes with the diagnosis that prescription law, one of property law’s core staples, is a fertile area of scholarly research with a particularly rich comparative yield. Louisiana, Germany and Russia differ widely as to the designs and operations of their prescription laws, which ultimately reflects distinct policies with regard to balancing the protection of ownership with the transformative effects of possession over time.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
艺术品和其他高价值动产的取得时效:路易斯安那州、德国和俄罗斯诉讼与立法的比较案例研究
摘要本文以艺术品和其他贵重物品为案例,探讨了路易斯安那州、德国和俄罗斯的动产取得时效法律。本文并非仅仅从法律体系各自的角度描述法律是什么,而是开发了一个独特的测试问题屏幕,这些问题在面对处方案件时已被三个样本司法管辖区的法院和文献进行了深入讨论。如果有的话,一个司法管辖区对处方法的操作设置了什么障碍?关于诚信的举证责任是如何分配的?司法管辖区是否承认未在立法法律中存在的收费原则?时效与不当得利的关系是什么?围绕艺术品和其他高价值动产的争议,为这些话题的讨论注入了强大的戏剧性,否则这些话题在公共空间不会受到太多关注。本文的结论是,作为物权法核心内容之一的时效法是一个学术研究的沃土,相对成果特别丰富。路易斯安那州、德国和俄罗斯在其处方法的设计和操作方面存在很大差异,这些法律最终反映了在平衡所有权保护与所有权随时间变化的影响方面的不同政策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
20.00%
发文量
31
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Comparative Law is a scholarly quarterly journal devoted to comparative law, comparing the laws of one or more nations with those of another or discussing one jurisdiction"s law in order for the reader to understand how it might differ from that of the United States or another country. It publishes features articles contributed by major scholars and comments by law student writers. The American Society of Comparative Law, Inc. (ASCL), formerly the American Association for the Comparative Study of Law, Inc., is an organization of institutional and individual members devoted to study, research, and write on foreign and comparative law as well as private international law.
期刊最新文献
Sovereignty, Territoriality, and Private International Law in Classical Muslim International Law Beyond Transplant: A Network Innovation Model of Transnational Regulatory Change The Irony of British Human Rights Exceptionalism, 1948–1998 Are Political “Attacks” on the Judiciary Ever Justifiable? The Relationship Between Unfair Criticism and Public Accountability Is Neutrality Possible? A Critique of the CJEU on Headscarves in the Workplace from a Comparative Perspective
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1