Land Law Assignment : The Case Of Cassegrain V Gerard Cassegrain & Co Pty Ltd.

The case Jonah v White (2011) 45 Fam LR 460, was first brought forward by Ms Jonah, seeking her relationship with Mr White be recognised as de-facto in order to apply for a property

The case was brought forward to the NSW Supreme Court in 2001 whereby Judge Hulme ordered both Respondents as negligent. This decision was reversed by the Supreme Court of Appeal whereby the judgement was granted in favour of the Respondents. This case affirms the previous decision.

Proprietary estoppel, on the other hand, is a “legal bar preventing a (first) party from denying another (second) party's right in first party's property where the second party has incurred costs in that property to its detriment”. Proprietary estoppel, like other types of estoppel, is not a remedy in itself but a tool to raise “estoppel equity”, on the basis of which the court is able to decide on the type of remedy that this equity will satisfy. Similarly to the need for the element of common intention for the purpose of establishing a constructive trust, there is a need for the establishment of an active or passive assurance on the part of the defendant that leads to some form of consequential detriment on the part of the claimant when acting in reliance on that assurance. Thus, there must be a causal connection between the actions undertaken by the claimant and the initial assurance on the part of the defendant. The extent and the nature of the detriment suffered by the claimant, however, appears to be substantially more flexible than that necessary to find the existence of a constructive trust. For example, in Inwards v Baker [1965], such detriment amounted to the improvement of the defendant’s land, while in Gillett v Holt [2001] it was manifested in both financial and personal detriment. Yet unlike in most cases involving common intention constructive trusts, in neither of

• Whether the transfer of chattels and other personal property attached to the land were not fixtures under the general law definition.

A case to support my argument was Marion J. Dombkowski v. Edgar R, Ferland. “Ferland claims title to his property by virtue of a deed from the Estate of Doris Rood in 2001. In 1994, Dombkowski acquired his property from his brother Anthony. The Roods lived next door when Anthony purchased the property in 1964. The court declared Dombkowski the owner of the property and enjoined Ferland from procession of the property

Facts: Plaintiff is claiming title to property via adverse possession because she and her husband resided on said property from 1951-1963. In 1951, plaintiff and her husband acquired ownership of property. In 1955, they borrowed $4,000 from Blue using the property to secure said loan. Blue assigned their interest in the deed over to Moheno. In 1958 the trust deed was foreclosed upon and the property was purchased by Moheno. In 1960, Moheno transferred the property to Berkey, her husband. In 1961, Berkey incurred debt against the property by borrowing $8,000 from Escoto. In 1962, Berkey gave the plaintiff (Harvey) a grant deed to the property as a civil suit settlement. In 1964, the Berkey-Escato trust was foreclosed upon and the defendant (Nurick) purchased it and was given a trustee’s deed. The plaintiff and her husband continually resided on the property, first as owners and

Whether the Claimant is the legal and equitable owner of the property despite the fact that

The issues generated in consideration of the contested property line between Bonnie and Amanda’s property include: i) Conventional boundaries: Does the fence between Bonnie and Amanda’s house constitute a conventional boundary? ii) Improvements by Mistake of Title: Whether the improvements made by Bonnie constitute an entitlement to the land.

In Korda v Australian Executor Trustees (SA) Ltd , the High Court unanimously allowed an appeal and overturned the Victorian Supreme Court of Appeal decision finding that the proceeds of a forestry investment scheme were not subject to an express trust for the investors by the operators of the scheme.

The land and business interests in Western New York were highly connected to the politics of infrastructure. Land and Business interests lobbied the state government for the creation of canals and railroads, due to their tendency to increase trade and the value of land in the surrounding area. For instance, the agricultural developer and politician, Asahel Cole, of Friendship, lobbied for the construction of the Genesee Railway and was appointed by the state legislature to manage the project. By the time of the 1840’s the Whig Party managed to establish significant support among voters in the region by championing infrastructure projects as a means of economic development. In the course of 19th century, various railroads and canals were constructed,

This essay will discuss the Supreme Court decision in FHR European Ventures LLP and others v Cedar Capital Partners LLC (Cedar) . The issue in this case was whether a bribe or secret commission accepted by an agent is held on constructive trust for his principal. This topic is a “relentless and seemingly endless debate” , as Sir Terence Etherton described, and that the “remedy awarded has vacillated for the last 200-odd years” . The major reason for the debate is because the principal will have propriety claim as opposed to a mere equitable compensation, if the bribe or commission is held on a constructive trust . The principal will be in a much more advantageous position if he was held to have propriety

As it has been a substantial part of the Land Registration Act 2002, I would like to look into the process of electronic conveyancing and how it supports my argument that the logic of English land law had been changed through the Act to a more rational, market efficient way. The Land Register was empowered to set up a “Land Registry Network”, this network could “go beyond the legal aspect of the transaction and could cover the whole transaction from the point when a property is put on sale”. The formalities of electronic dispositions were also introduced in the Act. The electronic document now had to “stipulate its effective time and date, as well as to include electronic signatures of all the parties by whom it purports to be authenticated plus every electronic signature has to be certified.” If an electric document “complied with these formalities, it was to be regarded by law as a written deed, signed by each individual and sealed by each corporation”. Another important concept development was network access agreement where the lawyers would be allowed to make changes to the title or the cautions register without involving the land registry officers. There were rules imposed on regulation of the network and in order to enter into a network access agreement an applicant had to fulfill criteria. The Act has also set out that whenever there was a conflict, the “overriding” nature of the obligation owed under the network access agreement, such obligation would

Schoolteachers, decided to buy a large property called Minerva lodge, where they planned to live, along with Eddie, Daisy's twelve-year-old son. They also planed to run an educational consultancy there. Constance and daisy each paid 60,000 pounds of the purchase price, which was 270,000 pounds. Adam paid the balance. The property was transferred to all three as joint tenants in law and equity, and the title was registered. Later that year at HM land registry.

On the contrary, in Bruton court’s understanding of “exclusive possession” was a relative concept. Exclusive possession granted to Mr. Bruton was found based on the fact that he was not required to “share possession with the trust, the Council or anyone else”[13] and “the trust did not retain such control”[14]. Whether the grantor possesses title or not was held to be irrelevant. Nevertheless, since LQHT in fact could not exclude the true owner (i.e. the Council) from taking possession, the exclusive possession enjoyed by the “tenant” would be “only as against the grantor and not the rest of the world”[15] and practically dependent on the contractual relationship. This has received support from later cases applying Bruton. In Islington LBC v Green[16]with similar facts to Bruton, the tenant raised an argument that the

In this book the writer has described about various legal laws and rules about the property. In this book the writer has updated about the various modern changes in the surveying laws and in the technology, especially in this book the writer has explained about addition of boundary experts and other geology experts in defining the various boundaries and also for collecting the information about the boundaries issues. This book is very much important in describing various legal decisions as the persuasive authority. This book is very much significant and important with the dealing of legal cases.