December 5, 2022
info:eu-repo/semantics/OpenAccess
Mickaël Gros, « The metamorphosis of property protection in family law », HALSHS : archive ouverte en Sciences de l’Homme et de la Société, ID : 10670/1.53eb85...
In 1804, the protection of property in family law was envisaged as protecting the property itself. This protection was understood as ensuring the property remained in the family. However, influenced by the changing conceptions of the family, the internationalisation of situations, and developments in civil law in general, the conception of the protection of property in family law has evolved considerably. The present thesis argues that transformations in the protection of property in family law have led to a change in the philosophy of protection which can be summarised as the protection of the person through property. The laws thus no longer protect property, but rather their capacity to be useful to the family members. This protection is refocused on the person. The protection of possession becomes a means to protect the possessor. This change of philosophy is notably achieved by emphasising, as a matter of principle, the individual will of family members, considered in their capacity as owners. The law is now premised less on the stipulation of behaviours deemed to be the norm or correct than on the freedom of each family member to act in accordance with his or her will. Thus, family law no longer dictates the behaviour expected of individuals within the family. It tends simply to ensure the greatest possible freedom for each individual. Family solidarity becomes dependent on the choices made by the individuals in the group. The law only takes the family bond into account in a residual way. The law acts as a guarantee of the minimum solidarity that the family must ensure in respect of its members. The legislator gives more space to the will of the family members to determine the way in which the protection of property will be ensured. In this way, property protection becomes privatised – a process embodied in legislative liberalism – and de-judicialised.