自由财产制度下信托财产的受益人所有权

IF 1.5 4区 社会学 Q1 LAW
Hanoch Dagan, Irit Samet
{"title":"自由财产制度下信托财产的受益人所有权","authors":"Hanoch Dagan, Irit Samet","doi":"10.1111/1468-2230.12788","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article argues that a liberal theory of property rights can help us resolve a century old debate about a foundational aspect of the trust, namely, the nature of the beneficiary's interest. According to orthodoxy, the beneficiary has a (weak form) of proprietary right to the trust res . But proponents of this view found it hard to defend it from attacks by Maitland and his successors who argue that central aspects of the beneficiary's right imply that the beneficiary's rights should be classified as a personal right against the trustee. The reason for their failure, we argue, is the misguided picture of property rights, as essentially the right to exclude, which they share with proponents of the obligation theory. Liberal property theory, by contrast, gives pride of place to divided ownership, of the kind exemplified by the trust, and accounts for all aspects of the beneficiary's right.","PeriodicalId":47530,"journal":{"name":"Modern Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Beneficiary's Ownership Rights in the Trust Res in a Liberal Property Regime\",\"authors\":\"Hanoch Dagan, Irit Samet\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/1468-2230.12788\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article argues that a liberal theory of property rights can help us resolve a century old debate about a foundational aspect of the trust, namely, the nature of the beneficiary's interest. According to orthodoxy, the beneficiary has a (weak form) of proprietary right to the trust res . But proponents of this view found it hard to defend it from attacks by Maitland and his successors who argue that central aspects of the beneficiary's right imply that the beneficiary's rights should be classified as a personal right against the trustee. The reason for their failure, we argue, is the misguided picture of property rights, as essentially the right to exclude, which they share with proponents of the obligation theory. Liberal property theory, by contrast, gives pride of place to divided ownership, of the kind exemplified by the trust, and accounts for all aspects of the beneficiary's right.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47530,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Modern Law Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Modern Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2230.12788\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Modern Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2230.12788","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文认为,一个自由的产权理论可以帮助我们解决一个世纪以来关于信托基础方面的争论,即受益人利益的性质。传统观点认为,受益人对信托财产具有(弱形式的)所有权。但这一观点的支持者发现很难在梅特兰及其继任者的攻击下为其辩护,他们认为受益人权利的核心方面意味着受益人的权利应该被归类为针对受托人的个人权利。我们认为,他们失败的原因在于,他们与义务理论的支持者一样,错误地将财产权视为本质上的排他权。相比之下,自由主义财产理论把分割所有权放在最重要的位置,以信托为例,并解释了受益人权利的各个方面。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Beneficiary's Ownership Rights in the Trust Res in a Liberal Property Regime
This article argues that a liberal theory of property rights can help us resolve a century old debate about a foundational aspect of the trust, namely, the nature of the beneficiary's interest. According to orthodoxy, the beneficiary has a (weak form) of proprietary right to the trust res . But proponents of this view found it hard to defend it from attacks by Maitland and his successors who argue that central aspects of the beneficiary's right imply that the beneficiary's rights should be classified as a personal right against the trustee. The reason for their failure, we argue, is the misguided picture of property rights, as essentially the right to exclude, which they share with proponents of the obligation theory. Liberal property theory, by contrast, gives pride of place to divided ownership, of the kind exemplified by the trust, and accounts for all aspects of the beneficiary's right.
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
2.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
61
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信