Changing Nature of Property

Classification of property is important in property law; however it is equally important to appreciate that classification of property in one era of time is not necessarily the same as that in another. In other words, the idea and nature of property change from one period of time to another. Any classification of property in one period of time must be understood within the social economical and political context of that era. This article seeks to examine, inter alia, how the idea and nature of property has changed with time and how it continues to change, why the nature of property changes, and, finally, what limits there are on the legal concept of property.
At a broad level of discussion, it has long been recognized that the concept or institution of property is dynamic. Property is dynamic because it is influenced by social, economical and political ideas. One commentator writes that “the meaning of property is not constant. The actual institution and the way people see it and hence, the meaning they give to the word all change over time… The changes are related to changes in the purposes which society or the dominant classes in society expect the institution of property to serve.” The idea of property changes with time so that what was understood as property in ancient law is not necessarily the same as that in medieval law or in the modern law. Moreover, the idea of property changes from one political thought to another. Ideas of property and ownership in western law traditions are not necessarily the same as in communist based traditions. The amount of private property n comparison to communal and state property varies with different political regimes. For example the idea of property in a capitalist system differs from that in other systems of political and economic thought. Property comprises control of material recourses, and every system of state makes its own decision as to who should control such material resources. Friedmann writes: “in socialized systems, the function and to some extent, the concept of property differs fundamentally from that of the systems in which property is the foundation of private enterprise. The transfer of the major means of production into the hands of the state, and the direction by a central economic plan removes property as an instrument of power from private ownership.”
The legal idea of property consists of a right held by a person in a thing of value. The right in a thing generates rights and duties between other persons in the legal system. The right of property is better understood as emanating from a property relationship between a subject and an object. The right is held for a particular purpose of function. The idea of property is, in so far as it consists of a claim or claims to material resources of value , remains fairly constant throughout time. What do, however change are the ingredients of the property relationship. This simply means that the subjects and objects of the relationship and the function performed by the right change with time. It is because of these changes that property is said to be a dynamic concept.