View Single Post
Old 07-10-2013, 09:27 PM   #17
gmw
cacoethes scribendi
gmw ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.gmw ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.gmw ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.gmw ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.gmw ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.gmw ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.gmw ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.gmw ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.gmw ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.gmw ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.gmw ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
gmw's Avatar
 
Posts: 5,818
Karma: 137770742
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Australia
Device: Kobo Aura One & H2Ov2, Sony PRS-650
Quote:
Originally Posted by tompe View Post
And it also can be said that you own the property.

I am talking about the legal concept of owning and not the ideal philosophical concept. And I am not even sure that the philosophical concept requires all the sub properties that are usually listed in philosophical definitions of ownership.
I'm not clear on legal or philosophical definitions of ownership. This is Wikipedia's article on the subject of Fee tail (Entail). Notice that it speaks about not even being able to use the property for security on a loan.

But legal niceties aside, the original point still stands. A property subject to entail was not purchased (was not sold to the ostensible owner suffering under the entail), it was inherited, so the question of being able re-sell it isn't applicable. Which still leaves us looking for an example of where you can purchase a property and not be entitled to sell it again.
gmw is offline   Reply With Quote