南非契约登记制度中的物权与人身权之分——第二部分:物权与人身权的语用区分

P. Badenhorst
{"title":"南非契约登记制度中的物权与人身权之分——第二部分:物权与人身权的语用区分","authors":"P. Badenhorst","doi":"10.3366/ajicl.2022.0423","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The second part of this article deals with the pragmatic approach of the South African courts to determine whether a right is real and, therefore, registrable in the deeds registry. The courts use a two-fold test to distinguish between real and personal rights, namely the subtraction from the dominium test and the intention test. It is indicated that the first test focuses on the impact of the right under investigation upon ownership while the second test focuses on the intention of the parties regarding the nature of the right when it was created. The application of the subtraction from the dominium test by the courts is discussed against the backdrop of a newly suggested classification of entitlements of ownership of land that are relevant within the context of the registrability of real rights. It is concluded that the common law distinctions between personal and real rights, and between ownership and limited real rights, still provide a solid conceptual basis in post-apartheid South African property theory.","PeriodicalId":42692,"journal":{"name":"African Journal of International and Comparative Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Distinction between Real Rights and Personal Rights in the Deeds Registration System of South Africa – Part Two: Pragmatic Distinction between Real Rights and Personal Rights\",\"authors\":\"P. Badenhorst\",\"doi\":\"10.3366/ajicl.2022.0423\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The second part of this article deals with the pragmatic approach of the South African courts to determine whether a right is real and, therefore, registrable in the deeds registry. The courts use a two-fold test to distinguish between real and personal rights, namely the subtraction from the dominium test and the intention test. It is indicated that the first test focuses on the impact of the right under investigation upon ownership while the second test focuses on the intention of the parties regarding the nature of the right when it was created. The application of the subtraction from the dominium test by the courts is discussed against the backdrop of a newly suggested classification of entitlements of ownership of land that are relevant within the context of the registrability of real rights. It is concluded that the common law distinctions between personal and real rights, and between ownership and limited real rights, still provide a solid conceptual basis in post-apartheid South African property theory.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42692,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"African Journal of International and Comparative Law\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"African Journal of International and Comparative Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3366/ajicl.2022.0423\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"African Journal of International and Comparative Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3366/ajicl.2022.0423","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本条第二部分论述了南非法院确定一项权利是否真实,因此是否可在契约登记处登记的务实做法。法院使用双重测试来区分真实权利和人身权利,即从支配权测试和意图测试中减去。据指出,第一个检验标准侧重于被调查权利对所有权的影响,而第二个检验标准则侧重于当事人对权利产生时的性质的意图。在新提出的与物权可登记性相关的土地所有权权利分类的背景下,讨论了法院从多米诺骨牌测试中减去的应用。结论是,普通法对个人权利和物权以及所有权和有限物权的区分,仍然为后种族隔离时期的南非财产理论提供了坚实的概念基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The Distinction between Real Rights and Personal Rights in the Deeds Registration System of South Africa – Part Two: Pragmatic Distinction between Real Rights and Personal Rights
The second part of this article deals with the pragmatic approach of the South African courts to determine whether a right is real and, therefore, registrable in the deeds registry. The courts use a two-fold test to distinguish between real and personal rights, namely the subtraction from the dominium test and the intention test. It is indicated that the first test focuses on the impact of the right under investigation upon ownership while the second test focuses on the intention of the parties regarding the nature of the right when it was created. The application of the subtraction from the dominium test by the courts is discussed against the backdrop of a newly suggested classification of entitlements of ownership of land that are relevant within the context of the registrability of real rights. It is concluded that the common law distinctions between personal and real rights, and between ownership and limited real rights, still provide a solid conceptual basis in post-apartheid South African property theory.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
30
期刊最新文献
An Evaluation of South Africa's Maternity and Parental Benefits Legislation in Light of the International Labour Organisation's Maternity Protection Convention and Recommendation Front matter The Supreme Court of Uganda and the Right to Bail Pending Appeal: Understanding Nakiwuge Racheal Muleke v Uganda (Criminal Reference No.12 Of 2020) (9 September 2021) Corporate Accountability to Local Communities for Investment-Related Harms: The Elusive Promise of Balanced Investment Treaties The Igiogbe Custom as a Mandatory Norm in Conflict of Laws: An Exploration of Nigerian Appellate Court Decisions
×
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