The Conceptual Foundations of France’s Fiducie Faced with the Trust of the Common Law: Between the Law of Contract and Property Law (Les Fondements Conceptuels de La Fiducie Française Face au Trust de La Common Law: Entre Droit Des Contrats et Droit Des Biens)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The new French fiducie is still struggling to define its conceptual foundation. Although unmistakably coloured by the lexicon of contract law, the French fiducie is best understood as located at the intersection of contract and property. Rooted in the idea of an autonomous patrimony, distinct from the fiduciary’s own patrimony, it evokes the concept of a patrimony by appropriation without, however, saying so. The concept of fiduciary property, inspired by the trust of English common law, and only implied in the French Civil Code, also lacks a clear identification. Taking a comparative approach, this article aims to show that the French fiducie has established a fiduciary property, which can be created by contract, but which gives rise to a number of effects that are “real” and, more specifically, based on ownership. The fiduciary property can thus be analyzed as a mode of civilian ownership inspired by the common law.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.040 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".