Traditional Conceptions of the Legal Person and Nonhuman Animals

SIMPLE SUMMARY: Every student comes across traditional conceptions of the legal person during law school. Professors usually explain that humans and corporations are legal persons, and that legal personhood is the most important category within the legal system as legal persons can enter into different legal relations, hold rights, and bear duties. Nonhuman animals are usually not mentioned in courses of this sort. This article examines four traditional concepts of the legal person and argues that nonhuman animals can be considered persons according to each concept. It notes that the law does not consider the concept of the human the same as the concept of the legal person, and that animals may benefit from an ecumenical defense, considering that legal practitioners such as judges commonly use these four traditional concepts of legal personhood, sometimes in the same ruling. ABSTRACT: Since Roman law, the category of the legal person has been the most relevant legal category, allowing humans and entities to act within the law and enter into legal relations. The legal system does not consider nonhuman animals as legal persons but as property or as sentient beings regulated by the rules of property. Throughout history, there have been different concepts of the legal person, and some are still relevant today. This article examines four traditional concepts of legal personhood, arguing that nonhuman animals can be considered persons according to each concept. The article reaches three main conclusions. First, the legal person is not the same as the human. Second, the debate between the equivalence and the subset views poses a dilemma between a revolution or the reform of animals’ legal status. Third, an ecumenical defense of animal legal personhood may benefit animals as it supports animal persons according to any of the traditional concepts of legal personhood.