English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

After providing a general outline of an approach employing techniques developed in the discipline of argumentation theory in the last issue of the European Property Law Journal (issue 1/2012, pp. 10–53), Part 2 of this article undertakes to exemplify the benefits of this approach by discussing selected examples taken from property law debates both on a national and an international level. The aim is to visualise weaknesses of existing argumentation and to make suggestions on how it can be improved; for instance by revealing elements that are only implicitly present in a discussion, by uncovering deceptive tendencies in arguments appearing to be perfectly reasonable at first glance, and by applying relevant rules of critical discussion so as to avoid fallacies identified by argumentation theorists.

european property law journal

Employing Argumentation Analysis in the Discussion of Optimal Rules for the Transfer of Movables – Part 2: Examples and Conclusions  Martin Lilja contributed to Chapter V of this article. The article was prepared within a larger research project on “Argumentation Analysis in the Field of Transfer of Movables”, financed by the Austrian Funds for Scientific Research ( Fonds zur Förderung der wissenschaftlichen Forschung,  FWF), project no. P21075.