Editing Usucaption (section)

====Background to usucaption====
{{main|Usucapio}}
The necessity for usucaption arose in [[Roman law]] with the divide between ''[[res mancipi]]'' and ''[[res nec mancipi]]''. ''Res mancipi'' required elaborate and inconvenient formal methods of conveyance to transfer [[title (property)|title]] (a formal ''[[mancipatio]]'' ceremony, or ''[[in iure cessio]]'').<ref name="Gaius">{{cite book|last=De Zulueta|first=Francis|title=The Institutes of Gaius|year=1946|publisher=OUP|isbn=0-19-825112-2}}</ref><ref name="Gaius (online)">{{cite web|title=The Institutes of Gaius|url=http://thelatinlibrary.com/law/gaius.html|publisher=thelatinlibrary.com|access-date=23 March 2012}}</ref> ''Res nec manicipi'' could be transferred by ''[[traditio]]'' (delivery) or ''in iure cessio''.

The remaining form of [[Conveyancing|conveyance]] was ''traditio''. This was an informal conveyance which only required the intention to transfer and [[deed|delivery]] of the property. If ''res mancipi'' were transferred by ''traditio'', full [[ownership]] would not pass and the recipient would become a [[bonitary owner]].

Therefore, another form of conveyance was required that did not necessitate a ceremony or appearance before the [[praetor]]. Because Rome was becoming mercantile, it was simply inconvenient to perform a formal conveyance simply because property was classed as ''res mancipi''. There might also be a demand to transfer property in private between the transferring parties, such as in the establishment of ''[[fideicommissa]]'' (Roman trusts).<ref>{{cite book|last=Johnston|first=David|title=The Roman Law of Trusts|year=1988|publisher=Clarendon Press|isbn=978-0-19-825216-0}}</ref>

The need for establishing ownership by means other than conveyance was also a result of the practical defect of a system of ownership based on valid transfer. Title to [[property]] could be challenged under this system, because it depended on the good title of the person from whom you acquired the property and so on. If any person's title in the chain were challenged successfully, then this would defeat any title derived from it. This defect required a means of establishing [[ownership]] that was not contingent upon a chain of title but could be established independently.<ref name='Johnston, "Context", pp.54-55'>{{cite book|last=Johnston|first=David|title=Roman Law in Context|year=1961|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=0-521-63961-1|pages=54–55}}</ref>