Переведите текст
PROPERTY LAW:
The Issue of Rights Law may be broken into Criminal Law and Civil Law. Civil Law may be broken into Property Law, Contract Law and Tort Law. Each of these three may be broken into law and equity components.
But it is Property Law which brings a need for the other many types of Civil Law. It is the right of private property ownership ("mine, not yours") which gives the need for Property Law. If there is no right to private property, then the king owns everything and punishes any who violates the laws he makes to protect what is his.
Well, if two of the actions in trespass were based upon injury to property or to property rights, a law of property would be required so that we could determine who owned what, or had what rights in what property. If you damage my property, we need Tort Law, if I want to sell the land to you we need Contract Law; if I want you to get my property when I die, we need Inheritance Law; if I want to pay by check, we need Negotiable Instruments Law; if we want to be merchants or manufacturers of products, we need Merchant Law; we need remedies and procedure to make law work for us when someone breaches the law.
Thus Property Law asks:
What are the respective rights: ownership - possession - use, present or future, contingent or certain, etc. of competing parties (that is, whose rights are the higher)?
Is the proof sufficient to tip the scales? What needs to be done to uphold, or protect the rights? Because of the importance attached to ownership of property and the means of production as well as the right to peaceable enjoyment, damages did not need to be shown to bring and win a case in Property Law. The earliest cases were all strictliability: volitionally do an act and you are liable without regards to the state of your mind. However, the state of your mind might effect the damage question.