Search

It is a research that questioned and investigated how is the protection of possession in the case of disseisin practiced against co-owners in the time-sharing regime of arts. 1.358-8 to 1.358-N of the Civil Code. For this, the research worked with two hypothetical situations: the first is the case of a disseisin practiced by a third party, that is, by a person outside the time-sharing contract; and the second concerns the possibility of the disseisin being practiced by one of the co-owners against another specifically or against all the others. To confirm the hypothesis, the research had to discuss, preliminarily, about the possibility or not of the split of possession (direct and indirect) in time-sharing, demonstrating that there is such a possibility, both in theoretical and practical bias. In order to achieve these objectives, the research carried out a qualitative bibliographic review to deductively confirm the hypothesis of the split of possession and disseisin practiced among co-owners. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Each of the two great law-making events of 1215, Magna Carta and the Fourth Lateran Council, included provisions relating to dispossession (spoliation, disseisin) and how to remedy some of its previous deficiencies. This paper considers the legal texts in some detail and the history behind them, in canon law and, in relation to this topic, its Roman base; and in England, notably the legislation of the Anglo-Norman King Henry II (1154-1189). It then considers the effect of these changes in both canon and secular law after 1215 in the rest of the 13th century and a little beyond. The Anglo-Norman royal law is also compared with variants found in boroughs or cities (like London); in northern France; and in the Liber Augustalis of Frederick II for his kingdom in Sicily and southern Italy.