Jurispudence New

Jurisprudence II
Jurisprudence II
“Law is reason, free from passion”-
Aristotle
Non-violence leads to the highest
ethics, which is the goal of all evolution.
Until we stop harming all other living
beings, we are still savages.
Thomas A. Edison
Negligence
•
Negligence is the blameworthy form of behavior. Behavior or conduct
is said to be negligent in two respects:
•
1) it is negligent in so far as it falls short of the standard of a
reasonable man in the circumstances and
•
2) it is negligent in regard to some person or thing.
•
So a negligent person is one who has no regard which an ordinary
prudent man would have for the interest of his fellowmen, and he
causes the harm no because he desires it, but because he is
indifferent.
•
But he term negligence is is not always understood to mean a
situation
Bahria|University|Islamabad
Continu…
•
Where is there is no foresight at all, it also includes situations where
there is foresight of the consequences with no desire for them.
•
Salmond divides negligence In two kinds: advertent where there is
foresight of negligence but no desire, and inadvertent where there is
no foresight at all
•
Austin defines negligence as the breach by omission of a positive duty.
•
This is the situation where there is no foresight at all and is what we
call simple negligence.
•
Negligence is a state of mind of one who inadvertently omits an act
Continu…
And breaks a positive duty.

•
For e.g a man drives a car at a furious speed through a narrow crowded
•
street. He breaks a positive duty because he fails to think of it. So there

is no foresight at all.
This and this alone is negligent wrongdoing.
•
Negligence is therefore culpable carelessness, the absence of such care

•
as it was the duty of care of the defendant to use.

Duty of Care:
•
A tort has been defined as a civil wrong which infringes a right and is
Continu…
•
Remedial by action for damages.
•
Prof Winfield states that tortious liability arises from the breach of a
duty to primarily fixed by the law: this duty is towards persons
generally.
•
The question which immediately follows is, Is there a legal duty to
take care, and is this duty towards the plaintiff?
•
Pollock makes the following observations in his Law of Torts: a man is
bound to exercise due care… or, rather, omits or falls short of it at his
peril, namely, of being liable to make good whatever harm may be
Continu…
•
Proved consequence if the default.
•
It can he taken that there is a reference of a duty of care but it is not
enforceable in any way.
•
For e.g. If a driver drives at 60km/hr and causes no damage it is said
that he is a criminal in heart but he owes no duty to take care to the
state.
•
So carelessness itself is no offence only if damages ensures out of that
carelessness an action for damages will lie.
•
Salmond’s view on this is the best on this point: in general we may
say
Continu…
That whatever an act would be civil wrong if done intentionally, it is

•
also a civil wrong if done negligently.

When there is a legal duty not to do a thing on purpose, there is
•
commonly a legal duty to take care not to do it accidently.

However, there are few exceptions: a person is under a duty not to
•
deceive another or others by willful or reckless falsehood, but unless

there is obligation, he is not responsible for false statements which
makes honestly believing them to be true, even if he is negligent in
making them.
The Standard of Care
•
English law recognizes only one degree of intention. It either exists
or does not.
•
Negligence may exist in varying degrees. Roman law recognized
several standards.
1. Culpa or culpa leivs was failure to show diligentia mexima, that
type of care.
2. Culpa lata, failure to use any reasonable care at all.
3. Culpa levis in concreto, failure to show ordinary diligence, or that
amount of care which he would ordinarily show in own affair.
Continu…
•
Following the Roman some jurist tried to a three fold distinction of
negligence.
•
To them it is either gross, ordinary or slight
•
However this had practical difficulties and for that particular reason
the distinction between civil and criminal law was followed.
•
In the case of R v Finney Lush J observes ‘ to render a person liable of
neglect of duty there must be such a degree of culpability as to
amount to gross negligence on his part.
•
Tuner argues that there must be proof that the accused was reckless.
Continu…
•
In the case of Andrews v Director of Public Prosecution Lord Atkins
observed ‘ for the purpose of establishing of criminal law there are
degrees of negligence: and a very high degree of negligence id
required. This same principle has been established in the Indian case
of Intoor john v State.
•
However in civil law the test is the conduct of the reasonable man.
This test according to Salmond is ‘ it does not demand the highest
degree of care which human nature is capable. The law demands not
that which is possible, but that which is reasonable in view of the
magnitude of the risk whether in fact it attained the standard of due
care established by law.
Continu…
•
But how to determine this standard of care, that of the reasonable
man. No hard and fast rule can be laid down, for what is reasonable
depends upon the circumstances of each case.
•
To determine this this standard of care three things have to be
considered.
•
The magnitude of the risk to which people are exposed ( Dabon v
Bath Tramsways Motors Co Ltd), the importance of the end to be
achieved ( Mc Carthy v Coldair Ltd), and the inconvenience and cost
of avoiding the risk ( Marshall v Gotham Co).
•
Fatal accidents could only be avoided if trains ran at ten miles an
hour however this would become a source of public inconvenience
Continu…
•
The standard of care therefore set up by law, is that there are cases
where the facts of the case themselves raise a presumption of
negligence.
Theories of Negligence
•
The nature of negligence has provoked a good deal of controversy.
•
Is negligence a state of mind or a state of body, is it merely a type of
conduct?
•
For this there objective and subjective theories of negligence.
•
SUBJECTIVE THEORY OF
NEGLIGENCE
•
To Salmond a careless person is a person who does not care or in
words a negligent wrongdoer causes the harm. For him it is the
mental attitude of undue indifference with respect to one’s conduct
and its consequences.
•
To Austin, negligence is the opposite of intention. Negligence is the
want of advertence which one’s duty would naturally suggest is the
fundamental or radical idea in conception of negligence.
The OBEJECTIVE THEORY
•
According to this view, negligence is not a state of mind, but a from
particular type of conduct.
•
So negligence consists not in manifesting the degree of care and skill
which is applied by a reasonable man, it consists of pursuing a course
of conduct different from that of a reasonable and prudent man.
•
Clark and Lindsell supports this theory ‘ negligence is the omission to
take such care as under the circumstances it is the legal duty of a
person to take. It has nothing to do with the state of mind.
•
Pollock has also written negligence is the contrary of diligence, nad no
one describes as a state of mind.
Continu…
•
Diligence has two meaning it may mean the ‘activity’ which is not a
state of mind, but it also means ‘care’ in contrast to negligence, which
has a mental element in it.
•
This view receives supports from the Law of Torts, which has been
moulded on Common Law principles, and common law has always
adopted the objective standards. So negligence is a breach of the
duty of taking care: a failure to achieve the objective standards of the
reasonable man.
Legal Rights and Duties
•
Man has to live in society. So suitable conditions of social life have
to be guaranteed by the state. This is done by the creation of
relationships between persons or in other words human conduct
has to be controlled.
•
This is usually done by the law commanding people either to do
certain things or forbear from doing certain things. These
commands are in the form of duties and to facilitate the operation
or performance of these duties, the law creates rights.
•
Pollock and Sir Salmond take this view for the nature of a legal right
cannot be explained without explaining the nature of a legal duty.
Continu….
•
For Sir Holland the immediate and main purpose of the law is the
creation of rights: ‘ the immediate objects of the law are the creation
and protection of legal rights’
•
Salmond defines rights as ‘ an interest recognized and protected by a
rule of right. It is an interest, respect of which is a duty and the
disregard of which is wrong.
•
WRONG: the infringement of a right is always a wrong. It is an act
contrary to rule of right and justice. A wrong is also a breach of duty.
•
DUTY: a duty is pattern of conduct prescribed by the law. It is always
a duty to do or not to do something, so it is an obligatory duty.
Continu…
•
A breach of a duty is a wrong so it follows that performance of a legal
duty is the avoidance of a wrong.
•
When law recognizes the an act as a legal duty, it is commonly
enforces the performance of it as it is primarily purpose of the state
to see that he on whom the duty is imposed performs it, so that his
conduct is not in conflict with the interests of the other members of
the society. So when a duty is disregarded he is punished for it.
•
RIGTHS: a right is created to facilitate the operation of a duty. Bit
there is another way of looking at it the way of Holland and Jhering
according to whom a duty is an act or forbearance commanded by
Continu…
•
The law to protect the interest of individuals.
•
This to them is the primary purpose of law.
•
So Jhering defines rights as ‘ a legally protected interest’. So when a
person has a legally protected interest he has to expect a certain
behavior towards him from others.
•
However every attack does not amount to a wrong. Bradford
Corporation v Pickles.
•
Although all rights are based on interests, not all interests give rise
rights.
Conitnu….
So for a right to exist it depends upon whether there is a duty or not.

•
And whether law can enforce it or not.

Gray points out ‘ the right is not the interest, but the means where by
•
the interest is secured.

•
For Salmond rights and duties are necessarily correlated. ‘there can be
no right without a corresponding duty without a corresponding right.
Every right or duty involves a vinculum juris or a bond of legal
•
obligation, by which two or more persons are bound together.
Characteristics of a legal right
•
According to Salmond there are five legal characteristics to a legal right,
1. it is vested in a person. Who is the clothed with the right, or who is benefitted
by its existence. He is also called the owner of right, the person entitled, or the
person of inherence.
2. It is available against a person, who is bound by the correlative duty. The
person bound or the person incidence
3. The person so bound , has to act or forbear in favour of the person entitled to
the right. This act of forbearance is the content of the right.
4. The act or forbearance relates to something which is designated to the object
or subject matter of the right
5. Every right has a title, a set of facts or events by virtue of which the right
becomes vested in its owner.
Continu…
•
A buys a piece of land from B. A is the owner of the right. The person
bound are the public to large for it is a right available against persons
generally.
•
The content is forbearance – non interference with A’s exclusive
enjoyment of land.
•
The land is the object or the right and the title is the deed of
conveyance by which the right and the title is the deed of conveyance
by which the right of ownership was transferred to A by his vendor.
continu…
•
The object or subject matter, that the thing over which the right is to
be exercised, is an essential element of every right.
•
Because some rights do not have a material thing as their objects,
jurists have taken divergent views eg a right to reputation.
•
Salmond very correctly has pointed out the object of right need not
always be something material.
•
It can be something immaterial. What is essential is, the interest
whether it is in respect of a material thing or immaterial thing, must
have attained legal recognition and protection as a right.
Continu…
•
Salmond supports the view and enumerates the following kinds of
rights object is something immaterial.
•
1) rights in respect of one’s own property: a right to life, health,
personal liberty and reputation falls within this class. It is life ,health,
reputation and liberty of the owner and these rights have received
recognition and protection from law.
•
2)Rights in respect of Domestic Relation: the right of a husband to the
society and affection of a wife and vise versa, of a father to that of his
child.
Continu…
•
3) Rights in respect of other rights: this is right to a right. A jus ad rem.
This phrase is applied to designate the right a man has in relation to a thing; it is
not the right in the thing
itself, but only against the person who has contracted to deliver it. If A enters
into a contract for sale with B. A gets right against B to have the right vested in B
to be transferred to him. When the sale is completed A gets the right itself.
•
a right in rem( item/property) or a right on personam (against a person)right is
always jus ad rem.
•
4) Rights over immaterial property: these are copy rights, trade marks,
commercial good will etc.
•
5) rights to service: rights vested in one person to another. Rights between
master and servant, physician and patient, advocate and client.
The classification of Rights
•
The classification given below are in no way exhaustive, for rights
may be classified in a great number of ways.
1. Perfect Rights
2. Imperfect Rights
3. Positive Rights
4. Negative Rights
5. Proprietary Rights
6. Personal Rights
7. Rights in Re Propria and Rights in Re Aliena
28
Continu…
•
8) Principal and Accessory Rights
•
9) Legal and Equitable Rights.
Perfect and Imperfect Right
•
A term that is given to the right according to the law that is different
to a moral right.
•
Salmond writes “ a perfect right is one which corresponds to a perfect
duty an perfect duty is one which is not merely recognized by law but
enforced by law.
•
Paying one’s debt is a perfect duty. It is a perfect right conferred to
the creditor.
•
A perfect right may become a imperfect right. Salmond writes “an
imperfect right is a right recognized by law, but could not be
enforceable due to its defects.
Continu…
•
The best example is the claim barred by the lapse of time. In such a
case, the law of the limitation declares it to be time barred.
•
This will prevent the remedy because a certain number of years have
passed over this claim without satisfaction.
Positive and Negative Acts
•
Positive right has a positive duty. A positive duty is such that the
person bound by it , is compelled to do some positive act in favour of
the owner of the right. Eg to recover money dues.
•
Right to fair treatment
•
Negative right corresponds to a negative duty. The person bound is
under an obligation to refrain from doing act which would cause
harm or prejudice to the owner of the right.
Propriety and Personal Right
Propriety rights, In this classification a man’s property or his estate,

•
assets is contrasted with his person or status.

Rights land, houses, chattels, business are all propriety, while the right
•
to life, reputation, rights of citizenship right which a man has as a

father or parent are all personal as they pertain to his status.
Principal or Accessory
A Principal contract is one which stands by itself, justifies its own

•
existence, and is not subordinate or auxiliary to any other.

Having ownership, possession, title on the land or building is a principal
•
right.
Accessory contracts are those made assuring the performance of a

•
prior contract, either by the same parties or by others, such as

mortgage, living as a tenant has the accessory right on the building,
easement
Rights in Re Propria or Re Aliena
•
Re aliena is a right vested in one person becomes the subject or
subordinate to an adverse right vested in another. A right in the
property of another. Eg If I lease out my farm my right becomes a
subject to and is limited by an adverse right. Right of easement.
•
Re Propria, The right of enjoyment which is incident to full ownership
or property, and is often used to denote full ownership or property
itself.
Legal and Equitable Rights
•
Legal rights are , clearly rights which exist under the rules of legal
systems or by virtue of decisions of suitably authoritative bodies
within them.
•
An equitable right is a legal right guaranteed by equity as opposed to
legal rights which derives authority from a legal source.
•
Today a legal mortgage of land must be created by deed, but an
equitable mortgage may be created by written agreement or by a
mere deposit of the title deeds.
•
When a legal and equitable right conflict, the legal will prevail.
Rights in Rem and rights in Personam
•
The distinction between rights in rem and rights in personam is quite
similar to the distinction between positive and negative rights
•
A right in Rem is also called a real right, is available against all persons
in general or the world at large. It is also called a personal right.
•
For eg I have a right against all persons not to work and operate on
my farm. (right in rem)
•
If I rent out my farm I have right against tenant for the rent. ( right in
personam)
Ownership and Possession
•
Ownership begins with human interaction. A man alone on a island
would not be in need of ownership.
•
When human beings live together, even a child has an idea about
‘mine’ and ‘yours’.
•
The concept of ownership prevalent in English law as found in Roman
law.
•
The concept was developed in detail by German jurist Savigny,
however, Dias argues that in England the concept of ownership went
under change depending on sociological factors.
•
Savigny focused on two points:
Continu…
Control over a thing.
•
The right to exclude others.

•
The Essential Ingredients of Ownership

The owner has the right to take possession of the thing that he owns-
1.
actual possession is not necessary as the owner may have been

deprived of ownership by someone else and he has the right to recover
possession.
The owner normally has the right to use and benefit from the thing-
2.
the right to take possession is a pure right in the meaning of a claim,

but this right to use and benefit from the thing is, is fact a liberty.
Continu…
3) The owner has the right to consume destroy and alienate the thing
owned.
4) The right of ownership is not limited by time as distinguished from
one in possession- possession is limited in time and will end at some
future date, but ownership theoretically is not limited by time.
5) Even when some rights are given away, the remaining rights stay with
the owner- covenants Tulk v Moxhay.
6) The right of ownership is not absolute and may be limited by the
operation of the law- the right may be restricted by the rights of the
encumbrance, by one in possession and by the rules of towns and cities.
Kinds of ownership
1. Sole ownership and Co-ownership- when a single person owns a
things it is called sole ownership, but it is possible for two or more
than two persons to own a thing will amount to co-ownership e.g
partners.
2. Trust and beneficial owners- a trust is a legal device that allows for
the separation of the powers of management and the rights of
enjoyment. Trust property is owner by two person at a time. The
relation between the two is such that one of them id able to use his
ownership for the benefit of the other.
3. Vested and Contingent Ownership- ownership is either vested or
contingent. It is vested when the owner’s title is already perfect.
Vested Ownership
An estate is said to be vested in ownership when it gives a present

•
right to the immediate possession and ownership of property.

X promised to give A,B and C Rs 10,000 to each of them if their
•
marriage occurs before the death of X. B marries before the death of X

on such marriage the gift becomes vested in case of B.
However, it is not dependent upon the fulfillment of any condition. it
•
creates immediate right though the enjoyment may be postponed.
Contingent Ownership
•
Contingent ownership is that it awaits or is dependent on the
happening of an event.
•
The title is not perfect but may become perfect upon the fulfillment
of an event till that it is imperfect.
Possession
According to Salmond, “ possession of material things is essential to

•
life; it is the most basic relationship between men and things”.

Man by nature, tends to possess things in furtherance of his selfish
•
interests.
Salmond maintains that possession is as difficult to define as it is
•
essential to protect.
To understand the full meaning of possession, we have to look at
•
possession in law.
Continu….
1. Possession in Fact
2. Possession in law.
•
Possession in Fact- in the ordinary sense of the world, a person can have
possession of a thing without actually holding it or using it any given moment
of time. If a man is wearing a coat, he is actually in possession of such a coat. If
he takes it off and puts it down beside him, he is still said to be in possession.
•
To understand whether possession actually exists, Salmond identifies two
elements.
a) Elements of Possession- (possession in law)
1. Corpus possessionis or actual physical control over a thing: this has two
ingrediants: 1) actual or potential control over a thing ( wearing a coat and
laying it aside); and 2) the power of excluding others and preventing them
from exercising physical control.
Continu…
•
Animus Possidendi or the intention to exercise control- there must
be an intention to appropriate to oneself the exclusive use of the
thing possessed. Thus, what the possessor needs, for e.g, is the
minimum intent to exclude others from whatever may be in his
pocket.
•
Salmond has given characteristics of to animus possidendi
1. is not necessarily a claim of right. If a theif ( B) gets possession of
the stolen good which B steals it from A, and C in turns steals from
B, B as a prior possessor has rights against C.
2. The claim of the possessor must be exclusive- that is, the possessor
must have the conscious intent to exclude others from the physical
control of the thing.
Continu…
3) The claim need not to be use things as owner, the possession of a

tenant or a borrower is as real as that of the owner. For the time being
they have the exclusive use of the thing, and his claim of exclusive use
is available even against the owner himself.
4) The animus need not to be specific- it may be general. A general
intent to possess a class of things is sufficient to give possession of the
individual objects belonging to that class. The owner possess every
book in his library even though e has forgotten about them.
Immediate and Mediate Possession
1. Mediate Possession- the possession of a person who holds a thing
through someone else is called mediate possession
2. Immediate Possession- while the possession of a person on who
acquires a thing directly and personally is called immediate or direct
possession.
Modes of Acquisition- possession is acquired in two ways; taking and
delivery.
1. Taking- taking the acquisition of possession without the consent of
the previous possessor.
2. Delivery- delivery is either actual or constructive
Actual Delivery- actual delivery is the transfer of immediate possession
•
Constructive Delivery- it is of two types
1. Surrender of mediate possession to a person already in immediate
possession- A lends a book to B , then gifts it to him and tells him to
keep it
2. Agreement touching possession- it is the transfer of mediate
possession, while immediate possession remains with the
transferor.
Corporeal Possession and Incorporeal
Possession
Legal Person
Salmond defines the term person as follows: ‘ a person is any being

•
whom the aw attributes a capabilities of interests and therefore of

rights’
According to Dias, ‘ the word person means a unit of jural relations.
•
(multitude of claims, duties, powers, liberties.
Meaning of Corporation
•
Legal person, other than human beings who are called natural
persons, are of three types:
1. Corporation- a corporation is a group or series of persons to whom
the law has assigned a personality.
2. Institution- the corpus be a church, hospital, library, university and
so on.
3. Fund or Estate- legal personality may be assigned to a fund, or a an
estate.
Types of Corporation
•
Corporations are of two types:
1. Corporation sole- a corporation is an incorporated series of
successive persons. In England, it was said, “ The King never dies” or
“the king is dead, long live the king. Today the word crown is
preferred. The President, the Prime Minister and also a host of
other official are corporations sole.
2. Corporation Aggregate- a corporation aggregate is an incorporate
group of co-existing persons. The corporation sole is a single person
whereas the corporation aggregate is a group that has been
granted legal personality by the law. The first corporation aggregate
wee companies.
Legal status of a dead man
•
Dead men have no rights because they have no interests. Their legal
personality is extinguished by death. There is nothing that concerns
them.
•
A dead man is supposed to have a right of burial. A corpse belonging
to no one. It cannot be disposed of by will or otherwise.
•
Criminal law secures a decent burial for all dead men, and violation of
a grave is a criminal offence.
•
The law does not allow for any attack on the reputation of a dead
man. In the case of R v Ensor Steph J declared that ‘ to libel the dead
is not an offence known to our law. The dead have no rights and can
suffer no more. Under Sec 499 the Indian Penal Code: it may amount
to defamation to impute anything to a deceased person.
Legal Status of a unborn persons
•
In the main view the law takes notice of living human beings. That is
not to say that is blind to their pre-natal existence.
•
We must however, distinguish a child who is living but not yet born.
•
a child in utero is regarded as a person in law. Property can be given
to such a child. He may even inherit: but if he dies in the womb or is
still in womb, his inheritance fails to take effect, and no one can claim
through him.
•
But if the child is born alive, and survives even if for a short time, his
contingent ownership becomes vested.
Continu…
•
A direct gift to a child in the womb. In Hindu law, if a partition is
made, a share should be allotted to a child in the womb. but all these
rights are contingent on his birth as a living human beings.
•
Personal rights are also recognized by law. In a Canadian case it was
held that a child born with a deformity because of negligent pre-natal
injury to its mother, could recover damages.
•
In criminal law the infliction of a pre-natal injury on a child, which is
capable of being born alive, and which prevents it from being so born
amounts to a child destruction, if he dies after being born alive, it may
be murder or manslaughter.
1. Fictitious Person
The interest of law does not stop with human beings. It goes further
•
and takes account of personality over a wider field.

The law attributes personality to certain things or groups of persons, by
•
way of fictitious when there is none in fact.

These fictitious, or juristic, or artificial persons come into existence
•
either by common law such as the Crown, or by Royal Charter eg the

colleges of Oxford and Cambridge, or by the Parliament authority such
as under the Companies Act, which his now the most usual method of
creation of.
The State
•
The laws which are the subject matter of jurisprudence are those eich
are almost exclusively formulated and enforced by a very special kind
of the society called STATE.
•
Firstly, the organization occupies, and claims exclusive and
permanent control over some definite territory.
•
It tolerates no interference by external authorities.
•
To Salmond it appears that a territorial basis is not an essential
condition to the existence of a state. This exclusive possession of
defined territory is a feature of all civilized and normal states… a state
without a territory, a nomadic tribe for eg is perfectly possible.
Continu….
•
But the modern international law will not recognize a community
however well organized it might be as a state if it does not occupy
and control a definite territory.
•
Secondly, population is essential for every state. They must be united
or organized into one unit for political ends. So a state in order to
achieve those political ends has an organized system of government
which establishes permanent institutions such as the legislature, the
judiciary, and the executive.
•
A state has, therefore, been defined by various jurists as ‘ A state is
an association which, acting through the law as promulgated by
government endowed to this end with coercive power, maintains
Continu…
•
Within a community territorially demarcated the universal conditions
of social order.
•
Woodrow Wilson has defined it as ‘ a state is a people organized for
law within a definite territory’
•
Salmond defines a ‘state as a society of men established for the
order and justice within a determined territory by way of force.’
•
These definitions give us a conception of the state’s minimum
function, that of maintaining a social order, or social life by
suppressing its foes both internally and externally.
The Functions of the State
•
The functions of a state can be divided into two kinds, essential and
secondary functions. According to Salmond, historically the
fundamental purpose and end of political society has been defense
against external enemies, and the maintenance of peaceable an
orderly relations within the community itself.
•
Prof

Jurispudence New

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Jurispudence New

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Jurisprudence II

And breaks a positive duty.

street. He breaks a positive duty because he fails to think of it. So there

Negligence is therefore culpable carelessness, the absence of such care

as it was the duty of care of the defendant to use.

That whatever an act would be civil wrong if done intentionally, it is

also a civil wrong if done negligently.

commonly a legal duty to take care not to do it accidently.

deceive another or others by willful or reckless falsehood, but unless

So for a right to exist it depends upon whether there is a duty or not.

And whether law can enforce it or not.

the interest is secured.

obligation, by which two or more persons are bound together.

Propriety rights, In this classification a man’s property or his estate,

assets is contrasted with his person or status.

to life, reputation, rights of citizenship right which a man has as a

A Principal contract is one which stands by itself, justifies its own

existence, and is not subordinate or auxiliary to any other.

Accessory contracts are those made assuring the performance of a

prior contract, either by the same parties or by others, such as

The right to exclude others.

The Essential Ingredients of Ownership

actual possession is not necessary as the owner may have been

the right to take possession is a pure right in the meaning of a claim,

An estate is said to be vested in ownership when it gives a present

right to the immediate possession and ownership of property.

marriage occurs before the death of X. B marries before the death of X

creates immediate right though the enjoyment may be postponed.

According to Salmond, “ possession of material things is essential to

life; it is the most basic relationship between men and things”.

3) The claim need not to be use things as owner, the possession of a

Salmond defines the term person as follows: ‘ a person is any being

whom the aw attributes a capabilities of interests and therefore of

(multitude of claims, duties, powers, liberties.

and takes account of personality over a wider field.

way of fictitious when there is none in fact.

either by common law such as the Crown, or by Royal Charter eg the

You might also like