Fruit (law)

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In jurisprudence, fruits are the products or benefits of a thing or a right .

General

Part of the legal term "fruit" is consistent with that in the Botany used concept of fruit , provided they humans as food is. Legal norms have to deal with fruits used by humans because this gives rise to legal issues such as property before and after their separation by harvest . In addition, the legal term “fruit” also includes the inorganic yield and even rental income of the landlord, lease income of the lessor or leasing fees of the lessor as fruits. As a result, the legal term has a greater content than the colloquial term.

history

The Roman law knew as fruits ( Latin fructus naturales ) the organic products of plants , animals and land and the yield of soil constituents as well as the rent or lease income ( Latin fructus civiles ) as payment for the transfer of use. The fruit profit ( Latin de fructibus et usuris ) can already be found in the Twelve Tables law in 450 BC . The calf of an animal is therefore considered to be the property of whoever owns the mother in good faith . Ulpian reported on a legal dispute by Publius Mucius Scaevola as to whether or not slave children were fruit. The solution was that all slave labor should be seen as fruit. According to this, fruit ( Latin fructus , "pleasure") was not only considered to be the organic product of a thing, but fruit enjoyment was also part of it. From a legal point of view, the fruit was seen as a thing created by the organic power of a body, which becomes an individual matter and therefore an object of disposition through the separation from that body (“mother's thing”) .

Roman law did not know of any separate ownership of fruits; rather, according to the substantive principle, these belonged to the owner of the mother's thing. The fruit or the yield was considered a prerequisite for the emergence of the legal institution of usufruct ( Latin ususfructus ). The economic idea of ​​usufruct goes back to Marcus Porcius Cato Licinianus in 160 BC. He judged the leasing of meadows or entire flocks of sheep as profitable. The "ususfructus" was considered to be the real right to use a foreign object while protecting the substance and to draw fruit from it. The personal servituts ( Latin servitutes personae ) summarized usufruct ( Latin usufructus ), right of use without usufruct ( Latin usus ), real right of residence ( Latin habitatio ) and the real right to the work of foreign slaves ( Latin operae servorum ) or animals ( Latin operae animalium ). The Romans distinguished fruits according to whether they were still attached to the mother thing ( latin fructus pendentes ) are (separately latin fructus separati ), they are still with the party that has harvested ( latin fructus extantes ) and if they sold or were consumed ( Latin fructus consumpti ). Roman law already knew the income from legal transactions, in particular interest ( Latin fructus civiles ).

In Germany, the loan word fruit can be traced back to the Old High German "fruht", which first appeared in 830 AD and meant the botanical fruit. The word formation is probably due to monks who used it to describe the products of their fields and gardens. In 1224 the Middle High German word "vrucht" appeared in the Sachsenspiegel , also associated with botanical content. The Sachsenspiegel determined that the field crops belong to the husband if he plowed the property when the wife died. The Sachsenspiegel expressly allowed those who bought the fruit to collect the fruit on unfamiliar land. According to Werner Ogris , the medieval legal language understood fruit only as the purely natural fruit, while other economic benefits ("civil fruits") were considered uses . The Codex Maximilianeus Bavaricus Civilis of January 1756 also understood this to mean “fruitful things”.

The Austrian Codex Theresianus of December 1766 already provided for separate ownership of the fruit owner (2, 3, § 1, 5); however, the Codex did not gain legal validity . The General Prussian Land Law (APL) of June 1794 described fruits as "uses of a thing that arise from nature itself, with or without additional processing ..." (I 9, § 220 APL). The legal definition of the APL still coincided with the botanical term of the fruit. It also recognized the legal beneficiary of a special right of ownership to fruits (I 9, § 221 APL). The term content was clearly expanded for the first time in the Saxon Civil Code of March 1865, which differentiated between natural and civil fruits (income) (Section 73 of the Saxony Civil Code).

The BGB , which has been in force since January 1900 , even extended the concept of fruit to inorganic things such as mineral resources , as long as the mother's thing ( soil ) is preserved.

Legal issues

The BGB detected in § 99 BGB direct special fruits (§ 99. 1 BGB), immediate right fruits (§ 99. 2 BGB) and indirect material defects and fruits (§ 99. 3 BGB). Material fruits are not only fruits in the biological sense, but also all organic products and other yields . This particularly includes products that can be obtained repeatedly. Due to the other yield obtained as intended, the use of the land is also a material crop. According to § 100 BGB, uses are the fruits of a thing or a right as well as the advantages that the use of the thing or right grants.

The “mother's thing” (for example the apple tree in relation to its apples ) must neither be destroyed nor significantly reduced in the course of fruit extraction ; its substance is to be preserved. Therefore, the hen's egg is a fruit of the chicken , but the chick is not a fruit of the egg. The beef is not a fruit of the beef . But if you cut a tree or harvest a head of lettuce , you will get fruit from the soil, because the soil as a mother's thing will be preserved and will produce new trees or salads.

species

All types of fruit are subject to the principle of preservation of substance, according to which the substance of the mother's thing must be largely preserved. The fruits appear next to the mother's business, which may be worn out or run down through use.

Not all natural products are fruit (felled trees), not all fruits are natural products (rent, loan interest). According to the law, the fruits of a thing represent their products or other yields, while income arises from the use of direct rights or indirect fruits or rights.

International

In Austria and Switzerland the term fruit is not included in the laws as a legal definition . In Austria, instead, “fruit usufruct” is regulated in Sections 509 to 520 ABGB . According to Section 509 of the Austrian Civil Code, usufruct is the right to enjoy a thing that is not part of the company "without any restrictions, while protecting its substance". According to § 512 ABGB, the fruit user must assume all burdens - including interest on loans - from the fruit yield. According to § 513 ABGB, the fruit user has the duty to make any repairs from the fruit yield. In Switzerland, the "usufruct" (writing: "usufruct") is regulated in Articles 745 to 778 ZGB . According to Art. 745 of the Civil Code, the usufruct of movable property, land, rights or property can be ordered. As a rule, it confers “full enjoyment of the item” to the entitled person. The usufructuary is obliged to maintain the usufructuary assets in their existence (Art. 764 Paragraph 1 ZGB). According to Art. 749 ZGB, the usufruct ends at the latest with the death of the usufructuary, who is liable for the loss of the thing according to Art. 752 ZGB and has the right to own, use and utilize the thing (Art. 755 ZGB). Art. 767 ZGB requires the usufructuary to insure the item against fire and other dangers in favor of the owner.

In France fruit ( French fruits ) in the Art. 583 et seq. Civil Code regulated (CC). According to Art. 583 CC, fruits are those natural fruits ( French fruits naturels ) that the earth produces under its own power ( French spontané ). The products of animals and the increase in cattle are also considered natural fruits. Commercial fruits ( French fruits industriels ) of a property are the property yields through cultivation . Bourgeois fruits ( French fruits civils ; Art. 584 CC) are rental, interest and lease income. Fruits can be movable, immovable, immaterial or consumable (Art. 587 CC).

See also

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ Ulpian Digest 24, 3, 7, 14.
  2. ↑ Ulpian Digest 5, 3, 29.
  3. ^ Gustav Ernst Heimbach, The doctrine of the fruit according to the common rights applicable in Germany , 1843, p. 1.
  4. ↑ L. 28 Digest, de usuris (22, 1)
  5. ↑ Gustav Ernst Heimbach, The doctrine of the fruit according to the common rights applicable in Germany , 1843, p. 15.
  6. ↑ Ulrike Köbler, Werden, Wandel und Wesen des German private law vocabulary , 2010, p. 90 f.
  7. ↑ Candida Ten Brink, The Justification of the Market Economy in the Roman Republic , 1994, p. 111
  8. ↑ Marcus Porcius Cato Licinianus, De agri cultura , 9, 149 f.
  9. ↑ Iulius Paulus , Digesten , 7.1.1: ( Latin usus fructus est iuris alienis rebus utendi fruendi salua rerum substantia )
  10. ^ Herbert Hausmaninger / Walter Selb, Römisches Privatrecht , 2001, p. 175.
  11. ^ Baron Fritz von Schwind, Römisches Recht: I. History, Rechtsgang, System des Privatrechtes , 1950, p. 197.
  12. ↑ Freiherr Fritz von Schwind, Römisches Recht: I. Geschichte, Rechtsgang, System des Privatrechtes , 1950, p. 196.
  13. ↑ Gerhard Köbler , Etymological Legal Dictionary , 1995, p. 139
  14. ^ Alfred Götze, Trübners German Dictionary , Volume 2, 1940, p. 458.
  15. ↑ Sachsenspiegel II, Art. 58 § 3: "... die herre takes the vrucht dar af."
  16. ↑ Werner Ogris, Concise Dictionary of German Legal History , Volume 1, 1964, Sp. 1316.
  17. ↑ Otto Palandt / Jürgen Ellenberger, BGB Commentary , 73rd edition, 2013, § 99 Rn. 2.
  18. ↑ Susanne Würthwein, Compensation for loss of the possibility of using an item or for lost benefits? , 2001, p. 97 ff.
  19. ^ Gaius Digest 7, 4, 30
  20. ↑ Hans Josef Wieling, Property Law: Volume 1 , 1990, p. 103.
  21. ^ Josef Kohler, Textbook of Civil Law , Volume 2, 1906, § 205.
  22. ↑ because the mother's thing (animal) must continue to live
  23. ↑ BGHZ 7, 208, 218.
  24. ↑ Susanne Würthwein, Compensation for loss of the possibility of using an item or for lost benefits? , 2001, p. 100.
  25. ^ Heinrich Gottfried Wilhelm Daniels, Code civil , 1805, p. 245.