El derecho romano de la propiedad en la doctrina civil colombiana
This article shows how legal writers in Colombia have frequently adopted the idea that Roman jurists conceived of three divisions within the right of ownership, called usus, fructus, and abusus. The text then turns to primary sources of Roman Law, and shows that this concept was not theorized by Rom...
- Autores:
- Tipo de recurso:
- Fecha de publicación:
- 2023
- Institución:
- Pontificia Universidad Javeriana Cali
- Repositorio:
- Vitela
- Idioma:
- spa
- OAI Identifier:
- oai:vitela.javerianacali.edu.co:11522/224
- Acceso en línea:
- https://revistas.javerianacali.edu.co/index.php/criteriojuridico/article/view/1007
https://vitela.javerianacali.edu.co/handle/11522/224
- Palabra clave:
- Derecho Romano
propiedad
Doctrina Civil Colombiana
“zonas ciegas”
cultura jurídica
Roman law
property
colombian civil doctrine
“blind zones”
juridical culture
- Rights
- License
- https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
id |
Vitela2_52a0dcfb261fa18d050f555319e1ffd6 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:vitela.javerianacali.edu.co:11522/224 |
network_acronym_str |
Vitela2 |
network_name_str |
Vitela |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Escobar Córdoba, Federico2023-03-232023-10-11T03:55:31Z2023-10-11T03:55:31Zhttps://revistas.javerianacali.edu.co/index.php/criteriojuridico/article/view/1007https://vitela.javerianacali.edu.co/handle/11522/224This article shows how legal writers in Colombia have frequently adopted the idea that Roman jurists conceived of three divisions within the right of ownership, called usus, fructus, and abusus. The text then turns to primary sources of Roman Law, and shows that this concept was not theorized by Roman jurists. The analysis continues with secondary sources of Roman Law, underscoring the fact that Colombian authors commonly describe this triple division as a Roman creation, while foreign legal writers on Roman Law generally do not. The article concludes by suggesting that this is one case of what the author calls “blind spots,” referring to the way in which members of the legal community tend to reproduce certain traditional ideas without seeing their real content or origin.El artículo muestra cómo la doctrina civil colombiana ha acogido recurrentemente la idea de que los romanos dividieron el derecho de propiedad en tres propiedades o atributos: usus, fructus , y abusus . Luego, el texto pasa a los textos primarios romanos, poniendo en evidencia la ausencia de esa tridivisión entre los jurisconsultos. El análisis continúa con los textos secundarios de derecho romano, resaltando la manera en que las obras colombianas con frecuencia le atribuyen al derecho romano la tridivisión, mientras los textos extranjeros normalmente no lo hacen. El artículo concluye proponiendo que este es un caso de lo que el autor llama “zonas ciegas,” la manera en que los miembros de una cultura jurídica reproducen ciertas ideas tradicionales sin ver su contenido u origen reales.application/pdfspaPontificia Universidad Javeriana Calihttps://revistas.javerianacali.edu.co/index.php/criteriojuridico/article/view/1007/860https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0Criterio Jurídico; Vol. 1 Núm. 6 (2006): Criterio Jurídico; 311-3261657-3978Derecho RomanopropiedadDoctrina Civil Colombiana“zonas ciegas”cultura jurídicaRoman lawpropertycolombian civil doctrine“blind zones”juridical cultureEl derecho romano de la propiedad en la doctrina civil colombianainfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion11522/224oai:vitela.javerianacali.edu.co:11522/2242024-06-25 05:12:39.451metadata.onlyhttps://vitela.javerianacali.edu.coRepositorio Vitelavitela.mail@javerianacali.edu.co |
dc.title.es-ES.fl_str_mv |
El derecho romano de la propiedad en la doctrina civil colombiana |
title |
El derecho romano de la propiedad en la doctrina civil colombiana |
spellingShingle |
El derecho romano de la propiedad en la doctrina civil colombiana Escobar Córdoba, Federico Derecho Romano propiedad Doctrina Civil Colombiana “zonas ciegas” cultura jurídica Roman law property colombian civil doctrine “blind zones” juridical culture |
title_short |
El derecho romano de la propiedad en la doctrina civil colombiana |
title_full |
El derecho romano de la propiedad en la doctrina civil colombiana |
title_fullStr |
El derecho romano de la propiedad en la doctrina civil colombiana |
title_full_unstemmed |
El derecho romano de la propiedad en la doctrina civil colombiana |
title_sort |
El derecho romano de la propiedad en la doctrina civil colombiana |
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv |
Escobar Córdoba, Federico |
author |
Escobar Córdoba, Federico |
author_facet |
Escobar Córdoba, Federico |
author_role |
author |
dc.subject.es-ES.fl_str_mv |
Derecho Romano propiedad Doctrina Civil Colombiana “zonas ciegas” cultura jurídica |
topic |
Derecho Romano propiedad Doctrina Civil Colombiana “zonas ciegas” cultura jurídica Roman law property colombian civil doctrine “blind zones” juridical culture |
dc.subject.en-US.fl_str_mv |
Roman law property colombian civil doctrine “blind zones” juridical culture |
description |
This article shows how legal writers in Colombia have frequently adopted the idea that Roman jurists conceived of three divisions within the right of ownership, called usus, fructus, and abusus. The text then turns to primary sources of Roman Law, and shows that this concept was not theorized by Roman jurists. The analysis continues with secondary sources of Roman Law, underscoring the fact that Colombian authors commonly describe this triple division as a Roman creation, while foreign legal writers on Roman Law generally do not. The article concludes by suggesting that this is one case of what the author calls “blind spots,” referring to the way in which members of the legal community tend to reproduce certain traditional ideas without seeing their real content or origin. |
publishDate |
2023 |
dc.date.accessioned.none.fl_str_mv |
2023-10-11T03:55:31Z |
dc.date.available.none.fl_str_mv |
2023-10-11T03:55:31Z |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2023-03-23 |
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv |
https://revistas.javerianacali.edu.co/index.php/criteriojuridico/article/view/1007 |
dc.identifier.uri.none.fl_str_mv |
https://vitela.javerianacali.edu.co/handle/11522/224 |
url |
https://revistas.javerianacali.edu.co/index.php/criteriojuridico/article/view/1007 https://vitela.javerianacali.edu.co/handle/11522/224 |
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv |
spa |
language |
spa |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://revistas.javerianacali.edu.co/index.php/criteriojuridico/article/view/1007/860 |
dc.rights.es-ES.fl_str_mv |
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.es-ES.fl_str_mv |
Pontificia Universidad Javeriana Cali |
dc.source.es-ES.fl_str_mv |
Criterio Jurídico; Vol. 1 Núm. 6 (2006): Criterio Jurídico; 311-326 |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
1657-3978 |
institution |
Pontificia Universidad Javeriana Cali |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositorio Vitela |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
vitela.mail@javerianacali.edu.co |
_version_ |
1812095059308314624 |