Usufruct

[vigil]

So in a Dean Clifford video, he makes an off the cuff comment about "usufruct", and how we should look it up, so i did.

Usufruct is a right of enjoyment enabling a holder to derive profit or benefit from property that either is titled to another person or which is held in concurrent estate, as long as the property is not damaged or destroyed. In many usufructory property systems, such as the traditional ejido system in Mexico, individuals or groups may only acquire the usufruct of the property, not legal title.
Usufruct comes from civil law, under which it is a subordinate real right (or in rem right) (ius in re aliena) of limited duration, usually for a person's lifetime. The holder of a usufruct, known as a usufructuary, has the right to use (usus) the property and enjoy its fruits (fructus).

I guess a direct translation would be "use of fruits" of an item.

When we go to the local virus (sars) we find:

FAQs: Usufructs

1. What happens when a usufruct terminates and the bare dominium holder gains/regains full title to the property? Is the return of the full title regarded as a disposal?

As time goes by the value of the interest of the bare dominium holder increases whilst the value of the usufruct declines. By the time the usufruct expires the value of the bare dominium holder’s interest will be equal to the full value of the property. Whilst it can be said that the bare dominium holder has acquired an asset (the usufruct) on expiry of the usufruct, that usufruct has a nil value at the date of expiry. In addition the bare dominium holder would not have incurred any expenditure in respect of the acquisition. No action is therefore required of the bare dominium holder on expiry of the usufruct.

Example:
John acquired a property with a base cost of R65 000 in 2002. In 2005 the property has a market value of R100 000. He passes a usufruct over the property in favour of Jane. At that stage the usufruct is worth R40 000 and the bare dominium R60 000. By passing the usufruct John has effected a part disposal. He has disposed of R40 000/100 000 x 65 000 = R26 000 of his base cost and will be subject to CGT on a capital gain of R40 000 – 26 000 = R14 000. Upon expiry of the usufruct in 2010 full ownership in the property is restored to John but no action is required of him for CGT purposes. In 2015 John sells the property for R 200 000. His capital gain at that stage is R200 000 – (R65 000 – R26 000) = R161 000.

I couldn't have put it more complex myself ... (?) I have no idea what they're on about? Sounds like a con game?

Here's another explanation, more involved by kind of makes sense:

Usufruct Example

A usufruct is a personal servitude. It is a right to enjoy the property of another and to take the fruits but to leave such property intact. It may be granted for life or for a specified time or until a happening of a specific event but where granted for a specified time or until happening of a specific event it will terminate if the use of usufructuary dies before such time or before such event has happened.

And then we have Shepstone & Wylie's article: (i'm bumping into this firm a lot lately in research)
http://www.wylie.co.za/%7Duploads/re...11july2008.pdf

So all this is fairly standard to civil law. How then when it (as Dean suggests) is applied to OUR NAME? It's OUR NAME, but the government is USING it, and enjoying the FRUITS of that use? In that case, there has to be a way to expire the usufruct? I wonder if renewing your ID has anything to do with that?

[Rusty]

Hello All, maybe how the usufruct is working is along these lines.
When born your parents complete a live birth certificate and that as an usufructuray agreement gives the State the right to use your name, thereby enjoying the fruits of that name without diminishing it in any way.
So they have the right of use of the name and they use that to create another person with exactly the same name as the one you are using, but it is a totally different person.
This is the State created and OWNED person that is on all the State issued instruments such as drivers licences, passports, social security, tax file numbers, you name it that is the person that we think is ours in commerce.
Now think about this, when you go into open a bank account you must supply evidence of identity and I know in this part of the world you can only use State issued instruments as evidence of identity, so who actually owns the bank account, who actually owns the landtitle that you purchased with fiat currency from that account.
When you go to work you are actually doing all the work and the State created and OWNED person is reaping all the benefits from your labour.
As you can see they are definitely enjoying the benefits or usufructuary rights to your name.
A quote from Black's Law ninth edition "In Roman law, the usufruct was considered personal servitude, resulting in a real right".
So I feel that our parents did not realise that maybe they were creating an usufruct by registering the birth of their child, when in real life they just used to record the birth in the family bible.
I know that people are going to say that they have to register the birth with the State, but we must remember that the law of the State only applies to citizens in that State.
Rusty