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 Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

This article aimed to bring an approach in terms of property law and its direct and indirect reflexes in the full exercise of domain. Knowing that there is no property without possession or possession without property, in this context it was verified that the right to property and the right of ownership are autonomous to each other, receiving differentiated treatment due to its elasticity or scope in which it implies in other branches of the right. These were the general objectives and in this wake the following possibility was suggested in relation to the specific objective: Would the Laws have been inspired by the Light of Creationism? What are the damages arising from the (Law No. 14,223/2006) in relation to the right to property and possession? In view of the hypothesis, this article became relevant by the historical Jewish-Christian content, respecting the free will of the Spirit of every human being. Thus, the research is characterized as an inductive method and nothing prevents the integrality of other methods by accidental or non-accidental routes. The research had as a source of references: the aid of doctrine, jurisprudence, laws and CF/88. Thus, because it does not have an aprioristic purpose, this article is open for future exploration.

Possession, a fact and a right: An analogy in the light of creationism