Everything on the Action ad Exhibendum. Why no the Mandament Van Spoile

Okay, i recently came across this term, a delictual term called " Actio ad Exhibendum". Shout out to GoLegal for the article, specifically shout out Ms Merilyn Kader for producing and writing the article titled "Piercing the Corporate veil". Well written and brilliant read, detailing the corporate law principle of piercing the corporate veil. This here isnt an article on the principle of piercing the veil, but just in the briefest of manner, piercing the corporate veil in the simplest terms is " looking under the shorts/skirts (depending on how you gender the corporation as a separate legal entity) of the corporation and finding that there is some junk in there. And once you find the junk, then that junk will be personally imputed on the director who used the companies separate existence as a proxy to do some junk. With that out of the way.

This article is about a term I found interesting. Actio ad Exhibendum.

In this post I will be discussing the essentials of this claim, and I will be discussing its difference from the Mandament van spoile and which claim is better. This will be short, brief (yes i know its the same word) and full of some shit but by the end, me and you will have an idea of what actio ad exhibendum and what mandament van spoile is and which one is better. From my initial read of the claim of Actio ad Exhibendum it seems that this claim has a similar effect to the MVS (Mandament Van Spoile) so then i thought to myself, why not have a showdown between the two and write about its difference and which one is better.

Introduction: What is Actio ad Exhibendum:

I spent a total of six years and four months studying law, immersing myself in legal terminology and writing to pass exams and advance toward a long-held vision. Thus, I can confidently state that during all that time, I never encountered the legal principle of Actio ad Exhibendum. So, there you have it, kids: when they say the profession requires continuous learning until death, they are not exaggerating. You learn something every single moment you read something in this profession. So read until you able to read in your sleep like doctor strange does in that one scene in the marvel movie Doctor Strange pt 1. Those who know, know and if you dont then its my recommendation that you check the first Doctor Strange movie out because its that amazing. Esoteric themes, concepts of space time, dimensions within dimension and an entity that devours the light of a planet making everyone all evil and stuff.

Back to the Program.

What is Actio ad Exhibendum? its a delictual claim whereby the plaintiff brings a claim for damages against the defendant who wrongfully dispossess the plaintiff of her property and later disposed of said property. The claim will be calculated on the basis of the value of the property at date of disposal

[Come with me into this imagination. Say you chilling and professor Xavier comes and takes somethings that belongs to you thinking that they have a claim to it, yet they dont. Professor X takes your thing unlawfully and later you pull up and bring to their attention that they are false and they have no right to be having your thing. Due to their stubborn cranium they spit on your face, give you the middle finger and proceed to sell your thing. This is when the Actio ad Exhibendum comes it. This delictual tool allows you to sue for damages provided ofcourse you can prove that you were the owner at time item was sold by Professor X and the professor, while you were owner, had your shit. Although you wont get your stuff back, you will get the money in which the item was valued at the time of disposal]

Within the Game, the actio ad Exhibendum is like a trump card in the event where you cannot employ the rei vindicatio. I know what you thinking, whats the rei vindicatio again? well look no further because i got you. The Rei Vindication, RV as I like to call it, is a ownership protection remedy that gives you the platform to have your thing lawfully returned to you by an unlawful dispossessor. For the RV to work, the unlawful dispossessor has to still have in their unlawful possession your property. But because people tend to be assholes and spiteful, during the course of having your property returned, a persons' heart will direct them to sell your stuff thinking that they will evade the action by doing that. Thats far from the truth because once the defendant disposes of the item then you draw your Action ad Exhibendum ( like in yu-gi-oh) and claim the monetary return of your property as it was valued at the date it was disposed. Nice right.

PS. wrongful of the dispossession need not be proven as it is regarded prima facie wrongful (The rei vindicatio and the actio ad exhibendum - Couzyn, Hertzog & Horak) shout out Couzyn Hertzog and Horak Attorneys for the read.

In reading on Exhibendum, I wondered on what's the difference between it and the mandament van spoile. And upon reading up on these two beautiful remedies, I realized that they are not that similar, nor can one be confused as the other. Its two different remedies protecting two different interests. But since am here already, let me continue as per the introduction that introduces the introduction.

Action ad Exhibendum v Mandament Van Spoile:

In explaining such terms, and their differences and similarities, we tend to want to sound smart and use big and complicated sentences to put our ideas across. Am either smart nor have big sentences in my "repertoire" (I know, I could not help myself- and that's a problem with a education).

So these two remedies protect different interest. Exhibendum, is more of an ownership based remedy. Meaning if you had ownership to the property and you were wrongfully dispossessed of, your claim would require the proof of ownership for it to succeed. Since you will not be returned to ownership of your property when the Exhibendum claim succeeds, you will be returned to the ownership of the money that the property was valued at time it was disposed of by the asshole. On the other side, the Mandament van Spoile, which is also known as MVS or spoliation, is a possession based remedy. Meaning for it to succeed possession has to be proved by the unlawfully dispossessed. Which is kind of crazy because this means even a thief can employ a MVS in order to regain possession of the property he/she/they stole from you after you have jumped his fence and taken yours back to its rightful home. {NOT SURE ABOUT THIS LADY JUSTICE, YOU MIGHT HAVE GOT IT WRONG HERE} .

CONCLUSION:

Scope out the situation, look at the facts, the parties and their action and then choose your fighter. Seek the power of the Rei Vindicatio or Action ad Exhibendum where your ownership has be fucked with through Action Proceeding. Employ the wizardry of the Mandament Van Spoile where your possession is subject to the force of being taken away without due legal procedure.

Disclaimer

The views and opinion expressed are those of my own, based on my own experiences and my subjective interpretation of the subject matter. They are authority nor should they be construed to be authority. Do your research, read further, gain knowledge and do what you want with it.