Real rights in Roman law. The concept and types of real rights

Roman law is known from the deepest antiquity. The Romans were exceptional lawyers, whose teachings survived their own civilization for dozens of centuries. On the basis of their legislative system, almost all the constitutions of European countries are built. Particularly specific property rights in Roman law. Many concepts from this area are to some extent used to this day.

What was meant by things?

In the very concept of "things" the Romans put far more significance than we. So, it included the definition of not only material objects, but even civil rights and relations. The thing was designated by the term "Res". All property rights in Roman law do not just perceive civil relations and laws in a material sense: this teaching was widely distributed among Roman philosophers, who most often were the most prominent legislators (corporal and incorporeal property).

Classification of things

However, one should not assume that this concept included everything in the world. It was fairly clearly divided so that there was no confusion. So, what did the notion of property law include?

First, all the objects of Divine law. This included all objects of worship, including those of special value in both material and spiritual sense. Among the "things" of each temple were all the lands that belonged to it, all the tombs and statues dedicated to the Roman gods.

Secondly, "human", human things. They were divided into two broad categories:

• Public property, which belonged to all categories of citizens of the state. These are theaters and stadiums, public markets, banks of rivers, lakes, seas. Is not it true that real rights in Roman law suspiciously resemble the generally accepted order of land use?
• The property is private, which belonged to specific citizens. They were divided into smaller categories, but this is not so significant.

What kinds of Roman law were responsible for this area? Of course, customary law and laws, since plebiscites did not have such powers.

Extended Classification of Things

So, you clearly understand that the Romans had physical and disembodied things (they were written above). But in reality the unit was much wider and much more complicated:

• Stay in circulation and withdrawn from it.
• Manzipiruemye and nemantsipiruemye (a fairly complex concept, we'll reveal it below).
• Complicated and simple.
• Employees for consumption and unused.
• Things that could be divided, as well as inseparable.
• Side, the main.
• Transmitted by generic definition and privately.
• Movable and immovable property.
• And again, bodily and incorporeal things.

And now we will clarify some of these concepts, having dealt with them in more detail. It is necessary to do this, since the history of Rome is very closely interconnected with all this.

Those who are in circulation and withdrawn from it

Retired commerce (res extra commercium) included all those items that served the needs of the people, and therefore could not be privatized. These are all the same temples, roads and embankments, sites for burial the ashes of the deceased (columbarium), as well as general physical objects (air, seas, rivers). Accordingly, property rights in Roman law in relation to the property not withdrawn from circulation (res in commercio) included a huge number of the most diverse things.

Manzipiruemye and unmanaged

The Italian lands, slaves attached to them, certain categories of buildings and working cattle were called the resigned objects (res mancipi). All this could be transferred solely through the mobilization. All these lands actually belonged only to the state. Thus, real rights are (in this case) only the possibilities for the transfer of "their" land parcel by inheritance.

Regardless of the nobility and origin of citizens to whom they were leased, these categories of land could be withdrawn from them at any time. Such areas included:

• Ager vectigalis. Earth "obrochnogo" type. We rented out to citizens. The initial term is five years, but in fact the lease was unlimited. They could be inherited without special legal incidents and obstacles.
• Ager privates vestigalisque. This is the land that the state or community could sell to private individuals. Specificity was that the buyer did not become the owner of the land itself, but only had the right to use it (but could transfer it by inheritance). In addition, the owner was required to pay a certain rent for the use of his allotment. This form of land use is interesting because it can be viewed as a transitional stage between communal land use and really private property.

What other categories of land included the notion of property rights? Now we will look at each category separately.

Ager quaestorius

In general, this type of land ownership was completely analogous to the previous one: the buyer received the right to own land, he had to pay rent for it. Its peculiarity is that the state could at any time, without explanation of reasons, terminate the transaction and demand the return of the land granted for temporary use. All these relations governed easements in Roman law (proprietary rights when using someone else's property).

Ager occupatorius

These are public land plots, clearly delimited by natural boundaries (river, forest, mountains). A feature of this category was that the land was not cultivated until the moment they were handed over to a private landowner. Only patricians could receive these plots, and often they simply occupied them. This category, theoretically, could be given to senior officials for the period of their tenure, but in fact the seizure of land was often unlimited.

In any case, the history of Rome knows many facts of seizure, after which the land could return to the actual ownership of the state only after the death of both the official himself and all his heirs.

Adsignatio

In private ownership, sometimes completely identical square allotments of the land were transferred. This is a kind of "six hectare" for the Roman plebs. Distribution of sites was of a massive nature, carried out in a particularly solemn atmosphere. Something like the property of Ager colonicus. It is also an Italian land, but located outside of Italy. Issued to the colonists with the right of inheritance. As a rule, rent for them was collected in a limited amount, after a certain period of ownership.

Ager locatus ex lege censoria

These plots of "improved planning" were distributed exclusively on a competitive basis. Simply put, they received the person who made the most profitable proposal, making the largest amount of money in the state treasury.

Important! The very procedure of the acquisition was an exceptionally complex legal practice, and five witnesses were required for its implementation (this regulated the servitudes in Roman law). If in the process at least one mistake was allowed, even in the spoken word, the whole transaction was automatically recognized as invalid. All other things belonged to the category of non-candidates.

How did the differentiated and unmanaged things differ?

The main difference between them was in the way they were alienated. The non-prescribed items were transferred by a very simple procedure - traditio. The second category was a very complicated business (as we just mentioned). It is not worth considering this as an empty whim of the Roman legislators, since important products were involved in the assets being manzipiruemym. Thus, the concept of Roman law in this field was unambiguous.

The state was extremely interested in preserving the rights to them by all available means. A complex rite was introduced precisely with the aim of preventing random persons from entering the category of their land users. It should be borne in mind that the mobilization as such was preserved only until Rome was a republic. The transition to the empire quickly eliminated these survivals of communal land management. At that time, ownership in Roman law became a much simpler concept.

Simple and complex things

According to the expression of Pomponia, simple things were defined as a single, indivisible concept. To such it was possible to include a stone, a log, a slave. All complex property objects were divided into two broad categories:

• All compound objects that were composed of many smaller things related to each other. These could include a ship or a house.
• The property, which consisted of many unrelated, but united by a common goal, things. These objects of corporeal rights could be represented in the form of a herd of cattle.

Movable and immovable property

Movable property was everything that could change its position in space. These objects could move as independently (cattle, slaves), and through their movement in space by some other force (utensils, clothes).

Accordingly, the real estate belonged to everything that could not change its position in space without preserving its integral structure. To this category, possession in Roman law included land plots, subsoil, all buildings. Unlike the current legislation, at that time almost identical normative and legislative acts were applied to both categories, so that all this division was practical in nature, being intended for ease of use.

In addition, in Rome, the category of real estate automatically equated all the things that the tenant created on land owned by the landlord. All this property became an integral part of the site and was equated with it according to its legal status.

Relationship to real estate

Still, real estate was considered a more complex category. The Romans were very cautious about the changes in the legal status of such property. Thus, the entry into possession of movable property was allowed after one year, for immovable property this period increased by half. It should be noted that already in the epoch of the principle, a separate system of Roman law was singled out, which regulated the relations in this area.

Generic and individually defined things

All things belonged to generic things, which could belong only to the family, did not have its own individuality. Of course, there was some uncertainty in this category, and therefore the Roman lawyers quickly established a simple rule: if a measure (volume, weight) could be applied to a thing, then it belonged to the clan. With the loss of such property, it could always be replaced by a similar one.

Accordingly, the complete opposite were individually identified things. This property, which was recognized as unique in its essence, it could not be replaced by something similar. In addition, such a thing could easily be distinguished from the number of similar ones (a separate vase). If the individually identified property was destroyed, then the contract of ownership on it automatically terminated, since the debtor would still not be able to provide something similar.

In order to better understand the essence of this phenomenon, it is possible to call such things for oneself interchangeable and indispensable. This concept was of great importance, since the system of Roman law based on it built a binding relationship.

Consumed and unused property

All categories belonged to the consumed category, which were lost by the owner when they were transferred to another person. This category can include food and money. As for the latter, the owner, who pays them, loses his funds.

Accordingly, unused items were worn out or lost not immediately, but after some time.

Secondary and main property

The main property is recognized, which has other things legally subordinated. Accordingly, the secondary property was recognized as an indirect property, which to some extent depended on the main thing. The collateral property was divided into categories:

• Part of the property.
• Some kind of individuality.
• Fetus.

Those parts of the thing that could not be separated from it without losing functionality, the laws of Roman law did not recognize the object of ownership. Otherwise, it could be considered in this aspect (the roofing material retained its functionality when detached from the house). In connection with some confusion of this area of law, the Romans singled out special conditions for attaching a certain part to the whole object.

The consequences of attaching a part to an entire object

So, if, during the accession, a part became useless, or acquired new properties, or became inseparable from another object, the subject lost ownership of it. But if both things remained unchanged after the merger, and the attached part could be separated from other assets, it could be withdrawn and fully restored in its legal status. In any case, ways to protect property rights in this case included a simple appeal to the court.

Accessories and fruits

Belonging is also called a side thing, but associated with the main property is not legally, but economically. It could well exist completely independently, be considered a self-sufficient object of law. However, only with the joint use of accessories and the main thing could be achieved the desired result. As a rule, all the legal rights that extended to the main property were also valid for all "attachments" attached to it.

The fruit was the object obtained from the property that it could produce (skin, wool, fruit). Accordingly, the fruits equaled the income that a person received from their sale. As in the case of membership, they were subject to all the legal rights accepted in relation to the main thing. Hence, by the way, the proverb also went: "The fate of belonging depends on the thing."

What are fruit-bearing things, the division of fruits into types

All the fruit-bearing property (res fructiferae) was characterized by that it could bear some fruits both as a result of its own, organic activity, and as a result of the application of human labor to them. To them could be applied the concept of "property" and other proprietary rights that regulated the processes of their turnover. As we have already noticed, all the things that were received on the land of the landlord were automatically considered his real estate and gave him the right to claim his share from their sale.

The fruits themselves, which were obtained as a result of all these processes, were divided into two large types.

The fruits of civil law (fructus civiles) . We just talked about them: they appeared as a result of various kinds of property transactions. In the modern sense, this is income earned from the exploitation of the same land. Such profit could be both permanent, but seasonal (harvesting and its subsequent sale), and short-term, which arose at a one-time sale of fruit-bearing things.

Fruits are natural (fructus naturales) . They were obtained due to a combination of people's labor and some contributing factors. Also divided into types:

• Fruits that were connected to the thing from which they occurred (fructus pendentes).
• Property that was already separated from it (fructus separati).
• Fruit privatized by someone (fructus percepti).
• Property that has already been processed (fructus consumpti).
• Those fruits that are already completely ready, but which must be collected (fructus perci piendi).

If the owner for some reason required to return to him a fruit bearing thing, all the fruits should have been returned with her. However, this was not the case when the property was already used in one way or another.

Wrapped things and non-negotiable property

Items in circulation (res in commercio) - this is a property that could participate in various transactions between people (exchange, purchase and sale). Accordingly, all things that because of their natural properties in this process can not participate, are recognized as property that can not be exchanged. Such items could not participate in exchange transactions, but they were recognized as objects of law.

In addition, civil Roman law implied the existence of objects that could give some fruits, but rightfully belonged to all categories of citizens. This category includes:

• Air.
• Rivers (that is, running water).
• Seas and oceans with all the fruits that can be obtained from them.

Finally

As you can understand, after reading this article, the Roman right to things was very multifaceted and extremely thoughtful from a legal point of view. Some of their rules and laws in this area may seem somewhat strange to modern man, but at one time they perfectly fulfilled their functions. It is no accident that the lawmaking of the Romans is still being studied at the best law schools in the world.