Questions On The Legal Right

This report analyses the altercation between Norvik Industry 's ( a building company), Water Corporation and Adrian and Linda Webb who are owners of a block of land on Flagstaff Crescent in Secret Harbour

The Plaintiff contests that orders to restrain the Plaintiff’s land use [8] by Pain J in the Land and Environment Court of NSW in 2005 constituted the ‘violation of correct legal procedures’ [14] and hence professional negligence, because the case was previously dismissed by Lloyd J [5].

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

Throughout history, people have had their basic human rights violated. This has been due, to other people's, groups, and the government's ideas, and actions. One of the renown instances of such thing happening is during the colonial times to 1865.In which millions of people had their basic human rights taken from them. In that time period, slavery was used to strip people of their basic human rights due to prejudice, and for the fact, it was a significant part of the American colony's economy.

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

To begin with, looking at the sandstone model we can then identify its status and ownership through its classification being established as either moveable or heritable. However, if the structure is held to be moveable in nature and subject to accession it would become the property of Lisa . The case of Zahnrad Fabrik Passau GmbH v Terex Ltd. When looking at cases surrounding moveable property, ‘diminution of efficiency’ may result as the test of accession . With this in mind, and applied to James’ case, the folly ‘rests on its own weight although the site had obviously been prepared for it’, it is further established that the folly is in one part, and needed to be removed by a crane to be replaced by a replica model due to ‘substantial damage’. It can be easily established that the folly has been in situ for a considerable amount of time and as illustrated in the case facts ‘The plot was very overgrown’ it was only after considerable landscaping

In 1983 & 1984, Galen Black and Al Smith lost their jobs for violating ADAPT’s (Alcohol and Drug Abuse Prevention and Treatment) abstinence-only policy. They used the drug peyote as part of their religious ceremonies as members of the Native American Church. They filed a claim for unemployment benefits, but they were denied because the reason for their dismissal was viewed as work-related misconduct (2/8). They filed a lawsuit saying this denial violated their First Amendment rights (8). Smith and his lawyer maintained that the state had no compelling interest strong enough to override the right of members of the Native American Church to practice religion. The state initially argued that its compelling interest lay in protecting the integrity

“There is a fundamental connection between human rights and peace on Earth when everyone’s rights are respected.” This is an inspirational quote stated by human rights activist John Humphrey. Human rights have been a growing movement for Canada and throughout the years it has developed throughout the nation. Canada has demonstrated a positive commitment to protecting LGBT rights. Also, Canada has demonstrated a positive commitment to protecting gender rights. Finally, Canada has demonstrated a positive commitment to protecting rights of ethnic minority from. Overall, Canada has presented a positive commitment to protecting human rights from 1912-2010.

I agree with most of your arguments, except the first one, stating that Andrew and Martin both own equal shares of the property. Since the original contract was for joint tenancy with rights of survivorship and not tenancy in common, Andrew never owned any of the property.

The High Court has as of late considered the fraud special case to indefeasibility of title of land possession in the case of Cassegrain v Gerard Cassegrain & Co Pty Ltd. The decision permits a wife to keep a half benefit for a dairy farm property in spite of paying no thought for it and just being the beneficiary of that intrigue due to her spouse 's fraud. The misfortune here is the party denied of a benefit for the land by fraud, while the victor is obviously the unwitting beneficiary of that interest.

Majority pointed to the critical difference between the 1996 and the 1902 Acts pointing to the differences between pawn or pledge and a chattel mortgage and the different property rights created by the two fundamentally different types of security. They go on to say that if pawn is given its accepted and long established legal meaning then the reasoning of the Court of Appeal is “necessarily flawed”. They go on to say that pawn and chattel mortgage are mutually exclusive

Torrens title is a statutory scheme that was introduced by the Real Property Act 1900 (NSW) and consequently abolished the problems inherent in the Old System title. One of driving forces behind the change was due to the uncertainty and cost instigated by a land transfer system, which solely relied on a chain of title deeds. This new system represented a dichotomy between registered and unregistered interests, and according to section 31B of the Real Property Act 1900 (NSW), the Registrar is now an integral part of the Torrens title. The Torrens system means that an individual will only need to construct a certificate of title for evidence of ownership, compared to producing an abundant of deeds. Therefore, when addressing the hypothetical problem question and dealing with multiple interests to the property, it is vital to consider the nature of the parties claims. This essay will address the issues raised by the hypothetical problem, by addressing the nature of the contracts of sale of land, indefeasible titles and the exceptions to such titles, priorities of interests, caveats and remedies available for mortgagees. Ultimately, we will be unraveling whose interests are prioritized over the property and the remedies available to those that have been negatively impacted by their interest over the property.

The Natural Rights Theory played a major role in the finding of this nation. The Founding Fathers placed tremendous value on this theory, modeling the Constitution and Bill of Rights to address the fundamental rights for all of it's citizens. Moral values are emphasized within these documents including respect for persons and justice. Impartiality is the underlying theme of the Bill of Rights, and all American citizens have this 'birth right'. As a first generation American, I have first hand knowledge of the sense of entitlement or 'privilege' of being an American. Americans in particular have a strong sense of entitlement when it comes to these rights, and may be viewed as overbearing especially in the eyes of other countries. In my opinion,

These passages all share the pressing issue that once plagued this country, and is continuing to plague others; the unjust rights or lack of rights I should say for women. In the first passage, Benson strongly uses the pathos persuasive technique. When Benson said "The women and children of America need leadership and protection. Who better to protect and serve our families than the men found at the head of each American household?" He taps into the men's emotional side, triggering that protective instinct that a man has over his family. The view that this passage conveys is one that tries to reasonably explain how woman are incapable of having such task. Benson then proceeds to include, "Scientific evidence has proven that women's brains are

In Lewisham Borough Council v Roberts[10], a case concerning delegation of power of requisition, Lord Denning affirmed that the Council ”cannot grant a lease or create any legal interest in the land…because it has itself no estate in the land out of which to carve any interest.” More recently, Neuberger J. in Re Friends Provident Life Office[11] reassured “a lease involves not only a contract, but also an estate in land”[12]. Therefore, the traditional concepts are long-standing principle and the possibility of leases existing merely in contractual nature and granting “tenant” merely contractual rights are denied by courts.