To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure email@example.com
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
The Continental systems of possessory protection seem to be different mixtures of the same ingredients: namely, the Roman interdicts, the actions developed for protecting the Germanic Gewere, and the canon law's actio spolii. However, through accidents of history, these same ingredients gave origin to very different systems.
The great divide between systems which require animus domini in order to have possession of a thing, and thus distinguish between possession and detention (for instance France and Italy), and systems which do not consider the intent to possess as owner as an indispensable requirement for possession (for instance Germany) is well known and studied. However, there are important, profound differences between systems which are traditionally seen as quite close. France and Italy, for instance, give different answers to the important question about the extension of possessory protection to movables. As I will try to show, the different legal systems have in a way bent the same arsenal of tools in different directions, so that even intelligibility between two different legal systems is difficult.
It is easy to see some converging lines which seem to be the result of common practical needs. Possessory actions make thus an interesting case study of legal evolution, showing both how different systems are built starting from the same roots and how they can converge to meet the same practical needs.
THE ORIGINS OF POSSESSORY ACTIONS
The possessory remedies in force all over Europe, as we will see, did not have their origins in Roman law. However, since these remedies were often re-read through Roman lenses during the Middle Ages, a first important historical root to be considered is the Roman interdicts. Roman law gave protection to possessors. One who had been dispossessed could recover land by bringing the interdict unde vi. One who had not been dispossessed could bring the interdict uti possidetis against a person who interfered with his possession of land.