The sixth volume of Wolff’s Jus naturae seems like the same kind of mishmash without any common theme as the previous one. Thus, Wolff merely begins with a new type of contract, this time, dominium utile, which means simply a right to use and enjoy freely something, where the substantial part of that property – the so-called dominium directum – belongs to someone else. In effect, the dominium directum is the more superior form of ownership, since the person with it can donate or sell the thing, although the person with the dominium utile would still retain their right to use and enjoy the thing. Both forms of ownership must have been constituted by a person who has previously had a full ownership of the thing in question: they might have either disposed of the dominium utile and dominium directum to two different persons, or they could have retained for themselves either the dominium utile or the dominium directum.
Now, Wolff goes through various types of dominium utile, first of which is called emphyteusis. In emphyteusis, the property in case is immovable (e.g. a piece of land), and the holder of dominium directum is provided an annual payment called canon by the holder of dominium utile or emphyteuta: in effect, this is the case of renting something for use. What this canon is can be determined freely by those making the contract – it can consist of money, but it can also consist of wheat, fruits, wine, eggs or really anything. Furthermore, the quantity of canon can be determined freely and it need not be proportional to the usefulness of the property for emphyteuta. The important point is that it must be paid, no matter of the financial situation of emphyteuta: for instance, if the case is of land, it must be paid, even if the harvest had been meagre. Of course, Wolff admits, it would be a decent thing to do, if the the holder of the dominium directum would let emphyteuta pay less or even not pay at all during bad years.
Now, Wolff continues, the contract at the base of emphyteusis can give the emphyteuta the right to hand over the property in question to another person, who then becomes the new emphyteuta. The contract might also specify that the holder of dominium directum is to be given what is called laudemium or honorary payment by the new emphyteuta, whenever this emphyteuta is changing. Then again, the person who has the dominium directum can hand over this ownership of the thing without asking emphyteuta anything.
Wolff notes that emphyteusis can have further conditions, for instance, it can last for some predetemined time or be granted to a certain group of persons (e.g. a family line). Naturally, when the time in question has elapsed or if there are no persons left that are specified in the contract, the emphyteusis is cancelled and the full right to the property is returned to the holder of dominium directum. On the other hand, if the holder of dominium directum dies without any heir, the emphyteuta does not get full rights, unless this has been expressly agreed upon in the contract. Instead, no one has in this case the dominium directum anymore. Then, Wolff explains, anyone would have the right to take this dominium directum and make it their own. If the person who does this happens to be emphyteuta, then the full rights return to them and emphyteusis ends.
Emphyteusis is a contract that can be repeated in the sense that if a person has acquired a right to use and enjoy some immovable property, they can sell or donate a further right to use and enjoy this same property to someone else (think of a renter of land renting a portion of this land to another person). This further contract is then called subemphyteusis. Largely the same considerations as concerned emphyteusis concern also subemphyteusis, but there is also the further condition that subemphyteusis cannot contradict what has been agreed concerning emphyteusis.
While in emphyteusis the original owner retains the primary ownership to a thing, which he then just, as it were, leases to someone else, the case is completely opposite in what Wolff calls contractus libellarius. Here, the original owner forfeits the ownership of a thing to someone else, but only on the condition that the new owner will provide an annual canon or payment to the original owner. Contractus libellarius has also a clause stating that after a certain period of time the new owner must renew the contract for a certain price. If the new owner fails to do this or fails to provide the annual payment, the thing in question is to be handed to a yet new owner, who then has to follow the same conditions for annual payment – unless, of course, the ownership of the thing returns to the original owner, which means then end for the contractus libellarius. Still, because the contractus libellarius means actual change of ownership, the new owner can otherwise use the thing as they want and even donate or sell it to someone else
Quite similar to contractus libellarius is jus censiticum, by which Wolff refers to a right of annual income that one has from immovable property that belongs to someone else. The similarity is even more marked in the case where this right is what Wolff calls census reservativus, where the owner has sold an immovable thing to someone else on the condition of annual income, the only differences being that census reservativus concerns explicitly immovable property and that there need not be any time limit attached to it. The other form of jus censiticum or census constitutus happens when a person buys or accepts as a donation for themselves jus censiticum to something.
The final type of dominium utile Wolff considers in this first chapter is jus superficiei, which concerns particularly property on someone else’s grounds. Usually, it means a right to have a building owned by oneself on the land of another person, but the right might also concern something else, like a garden or a forest. Jus superficiei must be conceded by the owner of the land – it can be freely determined whether the right is donated or sold or conceded for an annual payment. The building in question can already exist on the grounds or it might be constructed after the contract has been made. Furthermore, if the building burns down or is otherwise destroyed, the owner of the building, called also superficiarius, has the right to build a new one. Jus superficiei also extends to the use of the pathways the superficiarius has to go through when accessing the building. Since the building in question is owned by the superficiarius, they can naturally do with it anything that an owner can do, provided it does not break the rights of the landowner – they can e.g. donate, sell or rent the house to someone else.
The final thing Wolff deals with in the first chapter concerns the possible annual payments involved in any dominium utile. These payments, he notes,can be pensiones promobiles, that is, there might be a further condition that if the payment is not made on time, the required sum continues to increase.
Ei kommentteja:
Lähetä kommentti