More Subjects
Property law
The property rights that can support the claims of Albert about super achievers include use of sovereignty as a concept of public law. It states that no public good is significant than maintaining private property. This also includes identification of the new property right. It is important to consider the profits made from the area and the premise. There is also a legal principle that refrains an individual from gaining an advantage for self or causing damage to the others. Ownership over human tissue or DNA sequence requires patient's willingness. Albert can use the broadly worded consent for providing his claims and gaining ownership right.
The public factors that courts consider in whether such entities might subject to property rights or not include the appropriateness of the legal principle. It will be considered if Albert has ownership of the human tissue and DNA sequence that he aims at using for the research purpose. It is also crucial to consider the consent of the patients. He can claim legal right when he has obtained a clear consent from the patients that proves his ownership. The laws governing research with the human subjects are included for deciding the property rights. The action of Albert must not be beyond the laws and regulation of the state. The court will also consider the possible benefits and harms. The researcher must not inflict harm to the patients for his own advantage. This will require that Albert provides clear information to the patients about the possible outcomes. An appropriateness of metaphor is needed that reflects the fulfilment of the legal principles.
References
M R Cohen, 'Property and Sovereignty' (1927) 13 Cornell Law Quarterly 8, 15-21 accessible via
Allen v Roughley (1955) 94 CLR 98.
More Subjects
Join our mailing list
© All Rights Reserved 2024