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

In this paper, I examine the “right of necessity” which Hugo Grotius and Samuel Pufendorf acknowledge as belonging to persons in direst need. I will make explicit its deontic status, justificatory basis and demands, with the aim of assessing its distributive implications. As I will show, although both authors devoted considerable attention to the question of the power of necessity to suspend, override or dissolve property rights, the distributive implications of the right of necessity they put forward were almost insignificant.

Hugo Grotius and Samuel Pufendorf on the power of necessity to override property rights