Historicizing the Property Relation

Ann E. Davis

Chapter Chapter Seven in The Evolution of the Property Relation, 2015, pp 195-218 from Palgrave Macmillan

Abstract: Abstract The debates regarding the nature of property persist, both historically and in the present in the legal profession, and between the legal profession and the conventional public understanding (Ackerman 1977; Dagan 2011, 40). The paradoxical nature of property rests in the apparent objectivity of it, its “thinginess,” compared with its social, institutional dimensions (Singer 2000). The most common image of property is from Blackstone’s notion of ownership as “sole and despotic dominion” or Coke’s image of “a man’s home is his castle” (Singer 2006, 314, 332). Different schools of legal thought can be differentiated depending on the definition of property as an object owned by an individual compared with a social relation (Banner 2011, 45–72, 94–108, 257–275; Nedelsky 2011). For some textbook authors, the “thing of property [is] the depersonalized subject matter of the legal relations” (Smith 2014, 7).

Keywords: Property Relation; Private Property; Legal Scholar; Legal Profession; Legal Relation (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2015
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:pal:palchp:978-1-137-34656-8_7

Ordering information: This item can be ordered from
http://www.palgrave.com/9781137346568

DOI: 10.1057/9781137346568_7

Access Statistics for this chapter

More chapters in Palgrave Macmillan Books from Palgrave Macmillan
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().