Party Autonomy in International Property Law - Peace Palace Library
Party Autonomy in International Property Law - Peace Palace Library
Party Autonomy in International Property Law - Peace Palace Library
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
A. General Aspects of <strong>Party</strong> <strong>Autonomy</strong><br />
further implies that the content of the different types of property rights is<br />
likewise prescribed by statute (Typenfixierung).<br />
Under the wider <strong>in</strong>terpretation of the closed system, the rules on transferability<br />
also appear relevant. Article 3:83(1) BW states that (i) the ownership<br />
of th<strong>in</strong>gs, (ii) limited property rights and (iii) debts are transferable<br />
unless a statutory provision or the nature of the right dictates otherwise.<br />
Article 3:83(3) BW states that rights other than ownership, limited property<br />
rights and debts are transferable only if a statute so provides. Similarly,<br />
Article 3:80(3) and (4) BW states that assets are acquired or lost <strong>in</strong><br />
the manner prescribed for each type of asset by statute. 12<br />
F<strong>in</strong>ally, the controversial Article 3:84(3) BW enshr<strong>in</strong>es the prohibition<br />
of fiduciary transfers of ownership. 13 Any such fiduciary transfer, whether<br />
cum creditore or cum amico, is void. This prohibition is thought to create<br />
an obstacle to all forms of dual ownership and other ways of splitt<strong>in</strong>g<br />
ownership not laid down by statute. As such, Article 3:84(3) BW may<br />
be understood as one of the foundations of the numerus clausus <strong>in</strong> Dutch<br />
property law. 14<br />
The Dutch legislature considered the numerus clausus <strong>in</strong> some detail <strong>in</strong> the<br />
1960s and 1970s when it discussed the various drafts of the 1992 Burgerlijk<br />
Wetboek. The explanatory memorandum to the first draft, both written by<br />
the great 20 th century Dutch scholar Eduard Meijers, stated explicitly that<br />
the draft enshr<strong>in</strong>ed the numerus clausus pr<strong>in</strong>ciple. Later <strong>in</strong> the process,<br />
‘except for grounds of preference that are recognised by statute’ (behoudens<br />
door de wet erkende redenen van voorrang), and Article 4:42(1) BW def<strong>in</strong>es a<br />
disposition by last will and testament (uiterste wilsbeschikk<strong>in</strong>gen) as ‘a unilateral<br />
legal act [..], that is provided for <strong>in</strong> Book 4 BW or is recognised as such by<br />
statute’ (Een uiterste wilsbeschikk<strong>in</strong>g is een eenzijdige rechtshandel<strong>in</strong>g [..], die <strong>in</strong> dit<br />
Boek is geregeld of <strong>in</strong> de wet als zodanig is aangemerkt.).<br />
12<br />
As used <strong>in</strong> all these articles, the term ‘statute’ refers to a law enacted by parliament.<br />
Regulations and rules issued or passed by other governmental and local<br />
authorities fall outside the notion of statute.<br />
13<br />
Article 3:84(3) BW reads: ‘A juridical act <strong>in</strong>tended to transfer property for<br />
purposes of security or which does not have the purpose of br<strong>in</strong>g<strong>in</strong>g the property<br />
<strong>in</strong>to the patrimonium of the acquirer, after transfer, does not constitute<br />
valid title for transfer of that property.’<br />
14<br />
See A.H. Scheltema, De goederenrechtelijke werk<strong>in</strong>g van de ontb<strong>in</strong>dende voorwaarde,<br />
2003 (thesis Leiden), p. 371, and Struycken, o.c. 2007, § 8.2.4.2.<br />
62<br />
T.H.D. Struycken<br />
© sellier. european law publishers<br />
www.sellier.de