Introduction
The legal issues that need to be addressed in this case are as follows:
- whether Kevin can continue to use the strip of land as a driveway, and
- whether he now owns the workshop he built on the section of land on Milldam Country Park, at the back of his property, as he thinks.
The area of law l shall use to address these issues is that of the adverse possession of registered land.
The order in which l plan to deal with these legal issues at hand, is to first see whether the current laws relating to the adverse possession of registered land allow Kevin to make an application claiming the land as his.
If the current law’s allow him to make such an application, then the next step is to advise him on the best way he can make one.
Body of your plan
Issue
All the issues can be summarised into one, and that is whether Kevin can continue to use the Land he was using on Milldam Country Park belonging to the Hampshire County Council.
Law
The law l shall use to tackle this issue is that relating to the adverse possession of registered land. Kevin thinks he now owns th...
From an early age, Mabo was taught about his family’s land. In 1959 he moved to Townsville and settled down with his wife and children. He started becoming more involved in the community around Townsville, becoming an activist in the 1967 Referendum campaign, helping to found the Townsville Aboriginal and Islander Health Service and co-founding and directing Townsville’s black community school. Mabo’s motivation towards land rights didn’t start until 1974, when he was working as a gardener at James Cook University. Two historians, Noel Loos and Henry Reynolds recall a
...o the purchaser of unregistered land should the disposition be ultra vires, assuming that there is no actual notice of such then overreaching can take place. This has now evolved into their being no requirement for absence of notice. In addition Section 70 (1) (g) of the LRA 1925 protected as an overriding interest the property rights of those in actual occupation of the land as described by Lord Denning MR:
...d for you to sign and the land will be yours... no-one will bother you on your land” (pg.105). This incident leads to a long chain of corrupt acts. All community members signed, rather, finger printed the document and we’re assured “they could rely on this paper as it is the title to the land” (pg. 105). Two years passed and they returned with the document in hand, claiming the land was no longer theirs to live off of. The signed document was in truth an agreement to live on the land for a mere two years and a promise to uproot once the two years expired. In conjunction with the Labour Unions, Rigoberta’s father fights this upheaval, however the landowners bribe the judges lawyers and interpretors involved in the crooked legal battles, twisting the communities stance says the landowners offered a great deal of money to the judge through -machines/market/lawyers
This essay is about the land rights of of Australia and how Eddie Marbo was not happy about his land been taken away from him. In May 1982 Eddie Marbo and four other people of the Murray Islands began to take action in the high court of Australia and confirming their land rights. Eddie Marbo was a torres islander who thought that the Australian laws were wrong and who went to fight and try and change them. He was born in 1936 on Mer which is known as Murray Island. The British Crown in the form of the colony of Queensland became of the sovereign of the islands when they were annexed in1978. They claimed continued enjoyment of there land rights and that had not been validly extinguished by the sovereign. (Australian Bureau of Statistics 2012)
The need for the law to recognise possessory and equitable interests in land under a system of registration of title is a contested issue in Australia. The term ‘title’ means the extent of ownership over property as recognised by the legal system. For the purpose of this essay, a system of registration of title means the Torrens title system. The protection of possessory and equitable interests in Western Australia will be discussed, with reference to the Torrens title system and real property. It will be argued that there is still a need for the law to recognise equitable interests in land, however, the Torrens framework does remove the need for the law for the law to recognise possessory interests, in particular the doctrine of adverse possession.
As Vance Hughston writes “the major problem with the system for resolving native title claims is not hard to identify. It is the significant time and resources needed to resolve those native title claims which are opposed by government and other respondents” (Calma, 2009). Therefore, it is evident that the Native Title procedure needs some reforms to counteract the unjust requirements set out in section 223 of the Native Title Act 1933 (Cth). Within this section, it clearly expresses the marginal requirements imposed on the Native Title claimants – particularly subsection C. This subsection outlines the ongoing relationship that a native title claimant would have to sustain in order to be eligible for a possible trial. However, it poses many problematic and difficult situations towards the claimant, as they have to prove a continuous relationship with the land since sovereignty. In addition, section 237 of the Native Title Act states that the land mustn’t be partially or wholly extinguished by Government actions. If wholly extinguished, i.e. when claimants want areas such as “privately owned freehold land, pastoral or agricultural leases, residential, commercial, community purposes and in areas where governments have built roads, airports, railways, schools and other public works”, the
Gummow and Bell JJ concluded that clause 1 of the Deed signed Rural’s debts and its interests under the loan agreements to Equuscorp. Their Honours observed that the phrase “other remedies for these matters” located in clause 2 assigned a claim in restitution for money had and received . Heydon J agreed with this decision on similar grounds .
For land to be registered to a person in Australia it must be registered under the Torrens Title Registry; a sector of government that holds the entire land title register and thus is evidence to prove the fee-simple ownership rights (freehold title) as the owner. The Torrens Title is ‘a system of title by registration’, meaning a buyer can only receive the title of a parcel of land if it is first registered (Breskvar v Wall, 1971). Once an owner is registered into the title of the land, the owner has indefeasibility, meaning that once a title is registered to the registered proprietor it cannot be effected by any previous defects that may have existed in the title prior to registration (Stewart, C. 2009). The significance of this registration
There is uncertainty surrounding the law in regards to the ownership of property and proprietary estoppel. This paper will deal with these issues by analysing two cases that involve these questions. It will first address Jack’s case and whether the two objects in question are chattels or fixtures; then, it will examine a Laurence’s case and whether he can rely on proprietary estoppel or not. By dealing with the two cases, this paper will clarify questions of what constitutes a chattel or fixture, and in what situations proprietary estoppel may apply.
person receiving the land, had to go through ceremony in which they would say that they
Apparently McLaughlin did not think so and felt that by the action of Mr. Heikklia by changing the cost of parcels mean that they were without a “meeting of the minds.” There was no deal since the land transaction was not in writing. Then Mr. McLaughlin sued Mr. Heikklia on the grounds “to compel specific performance of the purchase agreements under the terms of the agreements before Heikkila withdrew his offer” (Cheeseman, 2013).
The expansion of the United States is such a vital part of American history, yet some often forget how it all happened. Many thriving settlers were given an extraordinary opportunity starting on January 1, 1863 that would end up laying the floor work for many Midwestern and Western citizens today. The rights and responsibilities to live on and maintain 160 acres of land may seem like a lot to take in for a student learning about an Act about land from the 1860s. However, think about all the people the Homestead Act of 1862 affected. There was a lot of pressure on the original homesteaders to make good use of their newfound land, the government was giving out land that wasn’t exactly theirs, and the Native American would have some their rights stolen.
the house and the land were meant to go to the oldest son, or in Mrs
One of the special concepts in land law is of overriding interests. The standard practice in the English land law is all the interest and rights affecting or is binding over particular a land should be registered in the Register. However, the concept of overriding interest denotes that there are interests which are binding on the owner (the registered proprietor) regardless of not being formally registered. It was introduced because in that era it was though that it would be unreasonable and unjust to overlook such rights and interest enjoyed. Overriding interests need not be registration to bind the legal owner of the land. Therefore, if the land is sold to another person the interests and rights would not be lost. It can be said that overriding by nature are unregistered if they are registered they will cease to be an overriding interest.
On the one hand, participatory approach to land use planning can provide openings for the decentralized administration of land management and enhance legal protection of local land rights through contributing to formal recognition of existing land tenure systems. According to Chigbu et al, (2015) four functions of land use planning that directly links to tenure security. (1) Its capacity to identify or determine land areas, parcels and uses and users. (2) Its propensity to enable documentation of land areas, parcels, rights, restrictions and responsibilities. (3) The opportunities it provides for stakeholder involvement, compensation of claims and community participation. (4) Its impact on land value, land markets and credit opportunities. On the other hand, land use planning, promoting sustainable natural resource use and environmental management are generally part of the mandate of local governments. And these prerogatives often tend to be weakly developed, both legally and with respect to capacity building and methodology (Hilhorst 2010). Unclear property rights and tenure insecurity are the major constraints to the potential of successful land use planning. According to UN-Habitat (2008, p. 17), poor land use planning associated with insecurity of tenure and incompletely specified land rights leads to problems of air and water-borne pollution from agricultural and industrial land use. Though there is a