Abstract
The current study aims at the so-called custody of things. Although France, Québec, and Romania are taken into account, the reader must be warned: this work is not to be placed on the field of comparative law; rather, foreign law should be noted.
After France is dealt with, Québec follows. Mainly, in the latter jurisdiction, emphasis is placed on some cases, i.e., Québec inc. c. Corbeil, Madore c. Bourque, and Lacombe c. Power. Also, Romania does not escape analysis.
The paper’s final portion deals with some concluding remarks. We do notice that the drafters of the Romanian Civil Code were animated by the desire to highlight an entity called “juridical custody”. Perhaps, it would have been desirable for said drafters to pay more attention to France.