The Good-Faith Purchase Doctrine in 247 Jurisdictions
-
Yun-chien Chang
Abstract
Scholars have argued that reasonable persons can disagree on what the most sensible good-faith purchase doctrine is. Indeed, using hand-coded data on this doctrine in 247 jurisdictions, this article finds that this doctrine has hardly converged-there are at least 23 different variants of this doctrine, from “no good faith required” to “good faith is all the purchaser needs.” The 23 variants can be grouped into three clusters: the categorical approach, under which stolen goods always revert back to original owners; the binary approach, under which the distinction between stolen and non-stolen goods matters, but stolen goods do not always revert; and the unitary approach, under which there is no distinction between stolen and non-stolen goods.
Note
Hana Chang, Kai-ping Chang, Ming-hsi Chu, Yenhsuen Li, and Ming Xuan Xu provided valuable research assistance. This article is funded by Academia Sinica’s Career Development Award 106-H02. An anonymous referee, Jiahui Ai, Stefan Bechtold, Rick Brooks, Kan-hsueh Chiang, Hung-Ju Chen, Wen-chin Chen, Wan-Jung Cheng, Tze-Shiou Chien, Wen-Tsong Chiou, Xin Dai, Giuseppe Dari-Mattiacci, Kevin Davis, Bob Ellickson, Lee Anne Fennell, John Ferejohn, David Goddard, Gerard Hertig, Rick Hills, Adam Hofri, Weiqiang Hu, Sam Issacharoff, Kamhon Kan, Hui-wen Koo, Clay Gillette, Benedict Kingsbury, Sheng Li, Meng-Yu Liang, Yael R. Lifshitz, Chien-Chieh Lin, Chung-Cheng Lin, Shu-Ya Lin, Geof Miller, Trevor Morrison, Michael Pappas, Ariel Porat, Ricky Revesz, Adam Samaha, Martin Walter Schonger, Rebecca Scott, Alan Schwartz, Daniela Sele, Howard S. H. Shyr, Swagatam Sinha, Jan Smits, Gijs van Dijck, Chih-Chun Yang, Kenji Yoshino, Tsong Min Wu, Katrina Wyman, and participants at the Faculty Workshop at New York University School of Law, Faculty Workshop at Institutum Iurisprudentiae, Academia Sinica, the Law and Economics Workshop at ETH Zürich, 2018 Association for Law, Property, and Society Annual Meeting held at Maastricht, the Netherlands, a Weekly Seminar at the Institute of Economics at Academia Sinica, Economic History Seminar at National Taiwan University Department of Economics, and Maastricht-European Private Law Institute (M-EPLI) Workshop provided helpful comments. Pierre Crocq and Aurore Chaigneau kindly provided insights into the French law in practice. Universidad de Monterrey, Departamento Académico de la Escuela de Derecho, Prof. Rafael Ibarra Garza and Cynthia Alejandra Sánchez Torres helped me understand the good-faith purchase law in each Mexican state.
References
Aynès, Laurent. 2008. Property Law. In Introduction to French Law 147–170, edited by George A. Bermann and Etienne Picard. Hague, the Netherland: Kluwer Law.Suche in Google Scholar
Balganesh, Shyamkrishna. 2016. Copyright and Good Faith Purchasers. California Law Review 104:269–322.Suche in Google Scholar
Chang, Yun-chien. 2018. Wealth Transfer Laws in 153 Jurisdictions: An Empirical Comparative Law Approach. Iowa Law Review 102 (5):1915–1944.Suche in Google Scholar
Chang, Yun-chien. 2020. The Many Faces of Adverse Possession: Economic and Empirical Analyses of Laws in 156 Jurisdictions. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3558800.10.2139/ssrn.3558800Suche in Google Scholar
Chang, Yun-chien, Nuno Garoupa, and Martin Wells. 2020. Drawing the Legal Family Tree: An Empirical Comparative Study of 170 Dimensions of Property Law in 129 Jurisdictions. Journal of Legal Analysis 12.10.1093/jla/laaa004Suche in Google Scholar
Dari-Mattiacci, Giuseppe, and Carmine Guerriero. 2015. Law and Culture: A Theory of Comparative Variation in Bona Fide Purchase Rules. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 35 (3):543–574.10.1093/ojls/gqv004Suche in Google Scholar
Dari-Mattiacci, Giuseppe, and Carmine Guerriero. 2019. Divergent and Convergent at the Intersection of Property and Contract. Southern California Law Review 92 (4):809–850.Suche in Google Scholar
Dari-Mattiacci, Giuseppe, Carmine Guerriero, and Zhenxing Huang. 2016. The Property-Contract Balance. Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics 172 (1):40–64.10.1628/093245616X14500948553956Suche in Google Scholar
Faerstad, Jan-Ove, and Martin Lilja. 2010. National Report on the Transfer of Movables in Norway and Denmark. In National Report on the Transfer of Movables in Europe: Volume 5: Sweden, Norway and Denmark, Finland, Spain 207–301, edited by Wolfgang Farber and Brigitta Lurger. Berlin: de Gruyter.10.1515/9783866539099Suche in Google Scholar
Hawkins, Ashton, Richard A. Rothman, and David B. Goldstein. 1995. A Tale of Two Innocents: Creating an Equitable Balance between the Rights of Former Owners and Good Faith Purchasers of Stolen Art. Fordham Law Review 64:49–96.Suche in Google Scholar
Klerman, Daniel. 2015. Jurisdiction, Choice of Law, and Property. In Law and Economics of Possession 266–289, edited by Yun-chien Chang. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781316017814.011Suche in Google Scholar
Krier, James E. 2006. Property. 17th ed. Chicago, IL: Gilbert Law Summaries.Suche in Google Scholar
Kuusinen, Miki. 2010. National Report on the Transfer of Movables in Finland. In National Report on the Transfer of Movables in Europe: Volume 5: Sweden, Norway and Denmark, Finland, Spain 304–391, edited by Wolfgang Farber and Brigitta Lurger. Berlin: de Gruyter.10.1515/9783866539099.303Suche in Google Scholar
Landes, William M., and Richard A. Posner. 1996. The Economics of Legal Disputes over the Ownership of Works of Art and Other Collectibles. In Economics of the Arts: Selected Essays 177–219, edited by Victor Ginsburgh and Pierre-Michel Menger. Bruxelles: Universite Libre de Bruxelles.Suche in Google Scholar
Levmore, Saul. 1987. Variety and Uniformity in the Treatment of the Good-faith Purchaser. Journal of Legal Studies 16 (1):43–65.10.1086/467823Suche in Google Scholar
Lilja, Martin. 2010. National Report on the Transfer of Movables in Sweden. In National Report on the Transfer of Movables in Europe: Volume 5: Sweden, Norway and Denmark, Finland, Spain 1–204, edited by Wolfgang Farber and Brigitta Lurger. Berlin: de Gruyter.10.1515/9783866539099.1Suche in Google Scholar
MacDougall, Bruce. 2009. The Market Overt Method to Obtain Ownership of Lost or Stolen Goods: Comment on Manning v. Algard Estate, [2008] BCSC 1129. International Journal of Cultural Property 16:85–93.Suche in Google Scholar
Mautner, Menachem. 1991. “The Eternal Triangles of the Law”: Toward a Theory of Priorities in Conflicts Involving Remote Parties. Michigan Law Review 90 (1):95–154.10.2307/1289534Suche in Google Scholar
Schwartz, Allan, and Robert E. Scott. 2011. Rethinking the Laws of Good Faith Purchase. Columbia Law Review 111:1332–1384.Suche in Google Scholar
Singer, Joseph William. 2010. Property. 3rd ed. New York, NY: Aspen Publishers.Suche in Google Scholar
Škerl, Jerca Kramberger, and Ana Vlahek. 2010. Property and Trust Law in Slovenia. Alphen aan den Rijn: Wolters Kluwer.Suche in Google Scholar
Smith, Henry E. 2012. On the Economy of Concepts in Property. University of Pennsylvania Law Review 160:2097–2128.Suche in Google Scholar
Sterk, Stewart E. 2012. Strict Liability and Negligence in Property Theory. University of Pennsylvania Law Review 160:2129–2156.Suche in Google Scholar
Tichy, Lubos. 2010. National Report on the Transfer of Movables in Czech. In National Report on the Transfer of Movables in Europe: Volume 6: The Netherlands, Switzerland, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Malta, Latvia 262–347, edited by Wolfgang Farber and Brigitta Lurger. Berlin: de Gruyter.10.1515/9783866539235.255Suche in Google Scholar
© 2020 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Frontmatter
- Frontmatter
- Editorial
- Inheritance certificates and EU law: Less European “effet utile” implies more national “pratique utile”
- Keeping up with the Times: The Transformation of the Publicity Regime with New Movable Property Security Rights and Developments in Blockchain Technology
- The Good-Faith Purchase Doctrine in 247 Jurisdictions
- The Right to Housing as a Right to Adequate Housing Options
- Discussing the Values: Retrieving Use Value of Property in Housing Contexts
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Frontmatter
- Frontmatter
- Editorial
- Inheritance certificates and EU law: Less European “effet utile” implies more national “pratique utile”
- Keeping up with the Times: The Transformation of the Publicity Regime with New Movable Property Security Rights and Developments in Blockchain Technology
- The Good-Faith Purchase Doctrine in 247 Jurisdictions
- The Right to Housing as a Right to Adequate Housing Options
- Discussing the Values: Retrieving Use Value of Property in Housing Contexts
