European property law: A methodology for the future

European Private Law - Current Status and Perspectives

Volumn , Issue , 2011, Pages 227-248

  van Erp, Sjef ^a  

^a MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84873905593     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1515/9783866539334     Document Type: Chapter

References (66)

1. J.H.M. van Erp, Europees privaatrecht in ontwikkeling?, in: A.A. Franken, P.C. Gilhuis and J.A.F. Peters (eds.), Themis en Europa: een opening van nieuwe grenzen? Opstellen over juridische implicaties van het Europa zonder grenzen en een verslag van het congres ter gelegenheid van het vijfde lustrum van de Faculteit der Rechtsgeleerdheid van de Katholieke Universiteit Brabant, georganiseerd op 10 november 1988 in samenwerking met de Juristenvereniging voor Afgestudeerden in Tilburg, JUVAT (Zwolle: Tjeenk Willink, 1989), p. 61 ff.
2. Art. 345 TFEU refers to the Treaties. This term is defined in Art. 1 TFEU: 1. This Treaty organises the functioning of the Union and determines the areas of, delimitation of, and arrangements for exercising its competences.
3. B. Akkermans, E. Ramaekers, Article 345 TFEU (ex Article 295 EC), Its Meanings and Interpretations, (2010) European Law Journal (ELJ), p. 292 ff. See also European Free Trade Association (EFTA) Surveillance Authority v Norway, case E-2 / 06, in which it was decided by the EFTA court on 26 June 2007, following ECJ case law, that the relevant parallel provision (Art. 125) in the Agreement on the European Economic Area (EEA) leaves the decision to nationalise or privatise undertakings to the Member States, but does not exempt them from application of the fundamental rules of European law such as the freedom of capital or the freedom of establishment. The case can be found electronically on: www.eftacourt.int.
4. Directive 2002 / 47 / EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 June 2002 on financial collateral arrangements, OJL 168, 27 June 2002, p. 43 ff.; Council Regulation (EC) No 1346 / 2000 of 29 May 2000 on insolvency proceedings, OJ L 160, 30 June 2000, p. 1 ff.; Trummer v Mayer, case C-222 / 97, [1999] ECR I-1661, decided by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) on 16 March 1999.
5. C. von Bar, E. Clive, H. Schulte-Nölke, (eds.), Principles, Definitions and Model Rules of European Private Law, Draft Common Frame of Reference (DCFR), Outline Edition (Munich: Sellier European Law Publishers, 2009).
6. Cf. Art. 3:98 Netherlands Civil Code which provides that the rules on transfer of property apply mutatis mutandis to the establishment, transfer and extinguishment of limited property rights. Examples of such limited property rights are pledge and usufruct.
7. Art. X. - 1:102 DCFR.
8. Art. X. - 1:201 DCFR.
9. See on the distinction between harmonisation and unification, also in light of the interaction between these legal phenomena and private international law, K. Boele-Woelki, Unifying and harmonizing substantive law and the role of conflict of laws (Lecture series Hague Academy of International Law) (Leiden / Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 2010), p. 31 ff. A view on European law as a system of conflicts of law can be found in C. Joerges, Re-conceptualizing European law as conflicts law, the ECJ's labour law jurisprudence and Germany's federal court, in: B. Verschraegen (ed.), Interdisciplinary studies of comparative and private international law (Vol. I) (Vienna: Jan Sramek Verlag, 2010), p. 7 ff. For the influence of political integration on legal integration.
10. D. Halberstam, E.M. Reimann, Unification of laws in federal systems, in: J. Sánchez Córdero (ed.), The impact of uniform law on national law. Limits and possibilities. First Intermediate congress International Academy of Comparative Law (Mexico City: Univer-sidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Centro mexicano de derecho uniforme and International Academy of Comparative Law, 2010), p. 47 ff.
11. See my Van Gerven lecture European and national property law: Osmosis or growing antagonism? (Groningen: Europa Law Publishing, 2006), my contribution to the Festschrift für Konstantinos D. Kerameus, From classical to modern European property law? (Athens / Brussels: Ant. N. Sakkoulas / Bruylant, 2009), p. 1517 ff. and my contribution Security interests: A secure start for the development of European property law, in: M. Hinteregger and T. Boric (eds.), Sicherungsrechte an Immobilien in Europa (Vienna: Lit Verlag, 2009), p. 3 ff.
12. P. Berlioz, La notion de bien (Paris: Librairie Générale de Droit et de Jurisprudence, 2007), p. 1.
13. R.M. Wibier, Financial collateral arrangements and party autonomy, Faculty of Law, Tilburg University, TISCO working paper series on banking, fi-nance and services, no. 02 / 10, available on the website of the Social Science Research Network: www.ssrn.com.
14. Cf. P. Legrand, Le droit comparé (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1999).
15. M.W. Hesselink, The new European private law. Essays on the future of private law in Europe (The Hague: Kluwer Law International, 2002), p. 11 ff.
16. See the Abolition of Feudal Tenure etc. (Scotland) Act 2000, 2000 asp 5, and the Explanatory Notes to it etc. (Scotland) Act 2000, 2000 asp 5, to be found electronically on: www.opsi.gov.uk.
17. Land and Conveyancing Law Reform Act 2009 Art. 9 and 10. The parliamentary history and final text can be found on the website of the Oireachtas, the Irish parliament: www.oireachtas.ie / parliament. Sections 9 and 10 state.
18. Cf. Explanatory Memorandum, p. 4.
19. The terminology is from W.N. Hohfeld, Fundamental legal conceptions as applied in judicial reasoning (reprint: Union, New Jersey: The Lawbook Exchange, 2000).
20. Cf. S. Passinhas, Dimensions of property under European law. Fundamental rights, consumer protection and intellectual property: bridging concepts? PhD thesis European University Institute (EUI), Florence, March 2010, to be found electronically at the website of the EUI: www.eui.eu, p. 126 ff. and p. 342 ff.
21. A. Lehavi, The dynamic law of property: Theorizing the role of legal standards, to be found electronically on the website of SSRN e.g., from a common law (US) perspective: www.ssrn.com.
22. H. Mostert, A. Pope, The law of property, p. 50 ff., discussing the subtraction from the dominium test as the filter through which a relationship must pass before it can be recognised as a property right For South African law, where such an ex post acceptance is allowed,.
23. Cf. C. Lebon, Het goederenrechtelijk statuut van schuldvorderingen (Antwerpen / Oxford: Intersentia, 2010), p. 133 ff..
24. G. Mémeteau, Droit des biens (Orléans: Éditions Paradigme, 2009), p. 37 ff..
25. F. Pollaud-Dulian, Le patrimoine et les biens qui le composent, in: Propositions de l'Assocation Henri Capitant pour une réforme du droit des biens (Paris: Litec, 2009), p. 15 ff.
26. J. F. Baur, R. Stürner, Sachenrecht (Munich: Verlag C.H. Beck, 2009), p. 1 ff..
27. T. Ansay, Third Way, in: J. Basedow, K.J. Hopt and H. Kötz, Festschrift für Ulrich Drobnig zum siebzigsten Geburtstag (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1998), p. 481 ff., p. 484 ff.
28. H. Mostert, A. Pope, (eds.), The principles of the law of property in South Africa (Cape Town: Oxford University Press Southern Africa, 2010) also from the perspective of a mixed legal system, i.c. South African law. p. 25 ff.
29. G.J. Elgueta, Divergences and convergences of common law and civil law traditions on asset partitioning: A functional analysis, available on the SSRN website: www.ssrn.com.
30. o 2010-658 du 15 juin 2010 relative à l'entrepreneur individuel à responsabilité limitée (the parliamentary history can be found on www.assemblee-nationale.fr and the text of the statuteon www.legifrance.gouv.fr).The statute introduces Art. L. 526-6 Commercial Code, which reads as follows: Tout entrepreneur individuel peut affecter à son activité professionnelle un patrimoine séparé de son patrimoine personnel, sans création d'une personne morale.
31. G. Gretton, Ownership and its objects, (2007) Rabels Zeitschrift für ausländisches und internationales Privatrecht (RabelsZ), p. 802 ff.
32. B. Akkermans, The principle of numerus clausus in European property law (Antwerp, Oxford, Portland: Intersentia, 2008), p. 410 ff.
33. J. F. Baur, R. Stürner, Sachenrecht (Munich: Beck, 2007) p. 30 ff.
34. Van Gerven lecture, p. 16 ff.
35. S. van Erp, Surety agreements and the principle of accessority - Personal security in the light of a European property law principle, (2005) European Review of Private Law (ERPL), p. 309 ff.
36. The definition is as follows: 'Ownership' is the most comprehensive right a person, the owner, can have over property, including the exclusive right, so far as consistent with applicable laws or rights granted by the owner, to use, enjoy, modify, destroy, dispose of and recover the property (VIII. - 1:202). See also, although focussing on the law of obligations, A. Vaquer, Farewell to Wind scheid? Legal concepts present and absent from the draft CFR, available on the SSRN website: www.ssrn.com.
37. J. Makdisi, Islamic property law. Cases and materials for comparative analysis with the common law (Durham, North Carolina: Carolina Academic Press,On Islamic property law 2005).
38. J.B. Claxton, Language of the law of trust, Revue du Barreau 2002, p. 275 ff. On p. 285 he writes: The trust now involves a holding where the concept of ownership is suspended. This principle is of paramount importance and will inform every characterisation of a relationship that involves a trust in Quebec. Some have stated that the trust property ceases to have an owner for the duration of the trust. It may cease to have an owner, but it is not without a master orcontroller, as these attributes are fully vested in the trustee. One can say that the personal concept of ownership (ownership can only be vested in a person) is suspended. As Brierley has said: "Le patrimoine fiduciaire se compose donc, quant à l'actif, des choses transférées et, quant au passif, des engagements assumés par le fiduciaire en vue d'assurer l'affectation." (Fn in the original omitted).
39. Cf. the definition of patrimoine in the proposals by the Association Henri Capitant for a new French property law (proposed Art. 519): Le patrimoine d'une personne est l'universalité de droit comprenant l'ensemble de ses biens et obligations, présents et à venir, l'actif répondant du pasif. Toute personne physique ou morale est titulaire d'un patrimoine et, sauf si la loi en dispose autrement, d'un seul.
40. W. Blackstone, Commentaries on the laws of England (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1765-1769), Book II On the concept of chattels, p. 385, 386.
41. S. Passinhas, Dimensions of property under European law, p. 348 where it is argued that (i)ntellectual and physical property should be treated identically in the law.
42. Cf. M.J. Falcón y Tella, A three-dimensional theory of law (Leiden / Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 2010), p. 305 ff. With regard to the law of obligations I defended this approach in my PhD thesis Contract als rechtsbetrekking. Een rechtsvergelijkende studie (Contract as a form of legal relationship. A comparative study) (Zwolle: W.E.J. Tjeenk Willink, 1990), summary in English, p. 319, 320.
43. Cf. S. Ginossar, Rights in rem - A new approach, (1979) Israel Law Review, p. 286 ff.
44. G. Mémeteau, Droit des Biens, p. 37.
45. Cf. H. Winkel, Zur volkswirtschaftlichen Theorie des Vermögens, in: H. Coing and W. Wilhelm (eds.), Wissenschaft und Kodifikation des Privatrechts im 19. Jahrhundert, Band VI (Frankfurt a / M: Vittorio Klostermann, 1982), p. 1 ff. In the words of Winkel, p. 11: "Mit dem Vermögensbegriff verbindet sich damit eine bestimmte Subjekt-Objekt Beziehung, eine gesellschaftlich-ökonomische Komponente: Eine bestimmte Person muss ökonomisch in der Lage und durch die Rechts- und Eigentumsordnung geschützt sein, über ein bestimmtes Objekteben sein Vermögen - frei und uneingeschränkt zu verfügen."ee also A. Candian, La notion de biens, in: K. Boele-Woelki and S. van Erp (eds.), General reports of the XVIIth congress of the international academy ofcomparative law (Brussels / Utrecht: Bruylant and Eleven International Publishing,2007), p. 121 ff.
46. K.H. Schwab, H. Prütting, Sachenrecht (Munich: Verlag C.H. Beck, 2006),p. 1 ff.
47. J. François, Les créances sont-elles des biens?, in: S. Bros and B. Mallet-Bricout, Liber Amicorum Christian Larroumet (Paris: Economica,For a critical analysis 2010), p. 149 ff.
48. See § 398 and § 1273 German Civil Code
49. Cf. J.L. Bergel, Les nouveaux biens. Rapport général, in: La propriété. Journées vietnamiennes, Travaux de l'Association Henri Capitant des amis de la culture juridique française, Tome LIII (Paris: Société de Législation Comparée, 2003), p. 203 ff.
50. J. Fairfield, Virtual property, (2005) Boston University Law Review, p. 1047 ff. Cf. also C. Rose, The several futures of property: Of cyberspace and folk tales, emission trades and ecosystems, (1998) Minnesota Law Review, p. 129 ff. Personal identity can also be seen as a new object of property law; the right of publicity can then be qualified as a new property right concerning personal identity.
51. J.T. McCarthy, The spring 1995 Horace S. Manges Lecture - The human persona as commercial property: The right of publicity, (1995) Columbia-VLA Journal of Law & the Arts, p. 129 ff., p. 134.
52. J. Fairfield, Virtual property, p. 1053.
53. B. Fauvarque-Cosson, A.-J. Kerhuel, French reactions to the Doing Business World Bank reports and economic analysis of the law, (2009) American Journal of Comparative Law, p. 811 ff. The Doing Business 2010 report is published on www.doingbusiness.org. See also the website to promote German law: www.lawmadeingermany.org and the statement by the Law Society of England and Wales on its website www.lawsociety.org.uk: "The law in England and Wales is transparent, predictable, flexible and supports the needs of modern commerce; in addition English is the language of international business. These features make England and Wales a highly attractive jurisdiction in which to resolve disputes. Working with law firms and the government, we promote these benefits to in-house counsel around the world."
54. Cf. B. Akkermans, E. Ramaekers, Krantz revisited: Free movement of goods and property law, paper available on the SSRN website: www.ssrn.com.
55. The relevant part of the decision is as follows
56. (...), it must be reiterated that, in its judgment in Case 7 / 68 Commission v Italy, cited above, which is expressly referred to by the national court, the Court defined goods, for the purposes of Article 9 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article
57. EC), which forms the first article of the third part of Title I of the EC Treaty, entitled 'Free movement of goods', as products which can be valued in money and which are capable, as such, of forming the subject of commercial transactions
58. Mr Jägerskiöld contends that fishing rights and fishing permits derived from them constitute 'goods' within the meaning of that judgment, in so far as they can be valued in money terms and may be transferred to other persons, as is expressly provided for by Article 5 of the Law on Fishing
59. (...)
60. It must also be observed that anything which can be valued in money and which is capable, as such, of forming the subject of commercial transactions does not necessarily fall within the scope of application of those Treaty provisions
61. As is clear from Council Directive 88 / 361 / EEC of 24 June 1988 for the implementation of Article 67 of the Treaty (OJ 1988 L 178, p. 5), of which the nomenclature of movements of capital annexed to it remains valid even after the entry into force of Article 73b et seq. of the EC Treaty (now Article 56 EC et seq.) (see, to this effect, the judgment in Case C-222 / 97 Trummer and Mayer [1999] ECR I-1661, paragraph 21), the Treaty provisions on the free movement of capital cover, in particular, operations relating to shares, bonds and other securities which, like fishing rights or fishing permits, can be valued in money and may be the subject of market transactions.
62. (...)
63. (...) The activity consisting of making fishing waters available to third parties, for consideration and upon certain conditions, so that they can fish there constitutes a provision of services which is covered by Article 59 et seq. of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 49 EC et seq.) if it has a cross-frontier character. The fact that those rights or those permits are set down in documents which, as such, may be the subject of trade is not sufficient to bring them within the scope of the provisions of the Treaty relating to the free movement of goods.
64. That conclusion cannot be affected by a reference to intellectual property rights, which, according to Mr Jägerskiöld, are covered by those provisions despite their intangible nature. 38. First, as the Advocate General points out in paragraph 21 of his Opinion, although intellectual property rights may affect intra-Community trade in goods, they do not in themselves constitute such goods. Secondly, intellectual property rights may affect trade not only in goods but also in services (see, in particular,Joined Cases C-92 / 92 and C-326 / 92 Phil Collins and Others [1993] ECR I-5145, paragraph 22).
65. Opinion of Advocate-General Fenelly no. 30. He continues: A television signal 'must, by reason of its nature, be regarded as provision of services'. Lottery activities also essentially involve the provision of services; the sending of tickets, advertising material and application forms not being 'ends in themselves'. On the other hand, waste, whether recyclable or not, constitutes goods, as 'objects which are shipped across a frontier for the purposes of commercial transactions are subject to Article [28], whatever the nature of the transaction'. It might, therefore, appear surprising that the Court has treated electricity, despite its intangible character, as goods. In so doing, the Court had regard to its treatment as goods in Community law and in the laws of the Member States as well as in the Community's tariff nomenclature. To my mind, electricity must be regarded as a specific case, perhaps justifiable by virtue of its function as an energy source and, therefore, its competition with gas and oil.
66. D.J. Thomas, Restatements relating to property: Why lawyers don't really care, (2004) Real Property, Probate and Trust Journal, p. 655 ff.