summary. the open window gave the wife the right to manage their property without informing the court, her right was considered to be covered by private law. The household head of the couple’s community property had the right to temporarily delegate power, as Dübeck points out. What opportunities did the wife have to use immovable property when her husband was home? The study shows that she used it in two ways: one was to utilize the capitalized value of their immovable property; the other way was to utilize the property’s actual monetary value. The use of the capitalized value of the immovable property meant making real property economically movable so that the movable part of the immovable property was made partible, which will be further clarified in the next section. In what follows, the woman’s use of the real property, the one that was impartible, the property with restrictions, is described. When the wife during the marriage made use of the actual value of the property, she had the right to do so when she needed to receive medical care or elderly maintenance. She also had the right to bequeath parts of her property. When she needed to use her property to receive medical care or elderly maintenance, she was required to stand as the drawer of the letter of intent, but with her husband’s approval. The document stated that she gave, for example, half her house to the care provider. But the care provider did not come into possession of the property until the woman died. During her life, she was completely in possession of the property and its likely income, usually in the form of rental income. The payment to the care provider first accrued in the form of ownership of the said property. Such a care provider did not have to be a relative. If the care provider was not a relative, this meant that the woman’s prospective family heirs could lose the property. The husband was still in possession of half of the property. What was repeatedly found is that immovable property could end up with an unrelated individual. In such cases, the immovable property was partible. As the wife carried out such transactions during marriage, she needed, as stated earlier, her husband’s consent. However, if she were a widow, she did not need permission from anyone. 290
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=