damage to propertx' was manitestlv unfortunate hut again was never replaced at Rome, and still casts its shadow in South Africa.' Land registration onK' began to he a reality in Idigland in l92^•, and was completed only in 1990.' \\ hen legislation is passed, it frequenth’ wears a wrongful guise residting frompast history: witness delict and quasi-delict, and mandate in the fVench code civil. Moreot er, for self- promotion law freijuenth’ tisurps an authoritx’ it does not ha\ e. \\ hen indi\ iduals fight for their rights within a legal framework, without the authorization of the state the law ma\’ undergo grotesque and illogical manifestations, as was the case with nuiucifuitio. I'aute de mieux, a legal institution ma\’ detelop tentacles like an octopus. The state may well not e\ en intert ene to restrain the growth of an extra tentacle. Hut indi\ idual struggles are often uiunailing. \\ hat concerns me as an indi\ idual passionately may he of little interest to v’ou todav^; tomorrow it may he of \ ital importance to you, hut not to me. Nothing then w ill he done. .\gain, 1 can helicwe that it woidd not he \er\’ difficidt to draft a common ci\ il code for luirope. Hut an issue suhsequenth' might appear \ ital in one country. Machinerx' for change must he found, hut modification of the code will he difficult. We li\e our law as culture, and cultural parameters are not usuall\’ perceixed hv those who li\e them. My .American students express surprise when I ask win’ male law professors wear ties to class, and why none of them (to my knowledge) regularly eats dogs. 2 See, e.g., Watson, Out of Context, pp. 92ff. 3 See, e.g., Cheshire and Burn's Modern Lawof Real Property, 16th ed. By E. H. Burn (London, 2000), pp. looff.; Robert Megarry and William Wade, The Law of Real Property, 6th ed., by Charles Harpum(London, 2000), pp. 20iff. 181
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=