02-13-2023-0132 - Dominium Eminent Domain dominium eminens

Dominium means "dominion; control; ownership". It is used in some phrases and maxims in legal Latin:

• Dominium directum – Direct ownership, that is control of the property, but not necessarily with right to its utilization or alienation. For example, a holder in life tenure has dominium directum but not dominium utile, because he may control the property but not exhaust its resources. This is to be distinguished from allodial right or fee simple (dominium plenum) and the right retained by the grantor of the life estate who holds the rights to the utilization of the land's resources (dominium utile).
• Dominium directum et utile – The complete and absolute dominion in property; the union of the title and the exclusive use.^[1] Equivalent in nature to dominium plenum or fee simple.
• Dominium eminens – The right of eminent domain.^[2]
• Dominium non potest esse in pendenti. – Ownership cannot be held in suspense/pendency; property cannot float in an uncertainty.^[3]
• Dominium plenum – Full or complete ownership of an estate; "fee simple".
• Dominium utile – Beneficial ownership of an estate. A holder of the reversion of a life estate holds the dominium utile of the property (although not the control or dominium directum) because he has the right to the long-term utilization any resources (mineral, vegetative, etc.) on the property but not to the immediate use of the property–the holder of the life estate has control of the property.
• Duorum in solidum dominium vel possessio esse non potest – Sole ownership or possession cannot be in two persons.

In general, "utilization" of resources on the property is subject to a reasonableness test. A life tenant with dominium directum of an estate may make reasonable use of resources, which means roughly renewable or trivial usage: the culling of firewood in the midst of an expansive forest, or the extraction of coal sufficient for home use from a fecund mine. Any commercialization (e.g. selling rights to the coal shaft) or large-scale exploitation (raising extensive erections on the estate using the timber resources) will implicate the dominium utile reserved to the holder in reversion and be subject to legal action at common law.

See also

• Heerlijkheid (Dutch)
• Usufruct (Latin)

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominium

Takings may be of the subject property in its entirety (total take) or in part (part take), either quantitatively or qualitatively (either partially in fee simple or, commonly, an easement, or any other interest less than the full fee simple title).

Meaning

The term "eminent domain" was taken from the legal treatise De jure belli ac pacis (On the Law of War and Peace), written by the Dutch jurist Hugo Grotius in 1625,^[5] which used the term dominium eminens (Latin for "supreme ownership") and described the power as follows:

The property of subjects is under the eminent domain of the state, so that the state or those who act for it may use and even alienate and destroy such property, not only in the case of extreme necessity, in which even private persons have a right over the property of others, but for ends of public utility, to which ends those who founded civil society must be supposed to have intended that private ends should give way. But, when this is done, the state is bound to make good the loss to those who lose their property.

A taking of property must be accompanied by payment of "just compensation" to the [former] owner.^{[citation needed]} In theory, this is supposed to put the owner in the same position pecuniarily that he would have been in had his property not been taken. But in practice courts^[where?] have limited compensation to the property's fair market value, considering its highest and best use.^{[citation needed]} But though rarely granted, this is not the exclusive measure of compensation; see Kimball Laundry Co. v. United States (business losses in temporary takings) and United States v. Pewee Coal Co. (operating losses caused by government operations of a mine seized during World War II). In most takings^{[citation needed]} owners are not compensated for a variety of incidental losses caused by the taking of their property that, though incurred and readily demonstrable in other cases, are deemed by the courts^[where?] to be noncompensable in eminent domain.^{[citation needed]} The same is true of attorneys' and appraisers fees.^{[citation needed]} But as a matter of legislative grace rather than constitutional requirement some of these losses (e.g., business goodwill) have been made compensable by state legislative enactments,^{[citation needed]} and in the U.S. may be partially covered by provisions of the federal Uniform Relocation Assistance Act.^{[citation needed]}

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eminent_domain