10. Proprietary Estoppel

2021 ◽  
pp. 343-397
Author(s):  
Ben McFarlane ◽  
Nicholas Hopkins ◽  
Sarah Nield
Keyword(s):  
Third Parties ◽  
Property Right ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Academic Debate

All books in this flagship series contain carefully selected substantial extracts from key cases, legislation, and academic debate, providing able students with a stand-alone resource. This chapter is concerned with proprietary estoppel. Proprietary estoppel is a means by which a party (B) can gain some protection against an owner of land (A), even if B has no contract with A and even if A has not formally given B a property right in relation to A’s land. Proprietary estoppel is therefore a means by which B can obtain an equitable interest in A’s land. It is noted that proprietary estoppel is very different from other forms of estoppel; so different that the term ‘estoppel’ is positively misleading. The chapter considers the requirements of a proprietary estoppel claim, including the role of unconscionability, how the courts determine the extent of any right arising through proprietary estoppel, and the impact of such rights on third parties.

10. Proprietary Estoppel

Land Law ◽  
2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ben McFarlane ◽  
Nicholas Hopkins ◽  
Sarah Nield
Keyword(s):  
Third Parties ◽  
Property Right ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Academic Debate

All books in this flagship series contain carefully selected substantial extracts from key cases, legislation, and academic debate, providing able students with a stand-alone resource. This chapter is concerned with proprietary estoppel. Proprietary estoppel is a means by which a party (B) can gain some protection against an owner of land (A), even if B has no contract with A and even if A has not formally given B a property right in relation to A’s land. That protection consists of A coming under a duty to B. Proprietary estoppel is therefore also a means by which B can obtain an equitable interest in A’s land. It is noted that proprietary estoppel is very different from other forms of estoppel; so different that the term ‘estoppel’ is positively misleading. The chapter considers how the courts determine the extent of any right arising through proprietary estoppel, and it also examines the impact of such rights on third parties.

10. Proprietary estoppel

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ben McFarlane ◽  
Nicholas Hopkins ◽  
Sarah Nield
Keyword(s):  
Third Parties ◽  
Property Right ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Academic Debate

All books in this flagship series contain carefully selected substantial extracts from key cases, legislation, and academic debate, providing able students with a stand-alone resource. This chapter is concerned with proprietary estoppel. Proprietary estoppel is a means by which a party (B) can gain some protection against an owner of land (A), even if he or she has no contract with A and even if A has not formally given B a property right in relation to A's land. That protection consists of A coming under a duty to B. Proprietary estoppel is therefore also a means by which B can obtain an equitable interest in A's land. It is noted that proprietary estoppel is very different from other forms of estoppel; so different that the term ‘estoppel’ is positively misleading. The chapter considers how the courts determine the extent of any right arising through proprietary estoppel, and it also examines the impact of such rights on third parties.

scholarly journals The Child's Right to Basic Education in Nigeria: A Commentary on the Decision in SERAP v. Nigeria

2018 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 639-648 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aisosa Jennifer Isokpan ◽  
Ebenezer Durojaye
Keyword(s):  
Basic Education ◽  
Case Note ◽  
Third Parties ◽  
Government Officials ◽  
Right To Education ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Impact

This case note focuses on the justiciability as well as the impact of corruption on the realisation of the right to basic education. Through an assessment of the decision of the ECOWAS Court in SERAP v. Nigeria, it emphasises the role of states in ensuring that corrupt activities of government officials or third parties do not affect the enjoyment of the right. It equally emphasises the role of the Nigerian courts in ensuring a justiciable right to education.

19. Leases

2021 ◽  
pp. 697-753
Author(s):  
Ben McFarlane ◽  
Nicholas Hopkins ◽  
Sarah Nield
Keyword(s):  
Property Right ◽  
Statutory Protection ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Academic Debate

All books in this flagship series contain carefully selected substantial extracts from key cases, legislation, and academic debate, providing able students with a stand-alone resource. This chapter focuses on a key feature of a lease: its ability to count as a property right. It explores the three principal questions that apply to any property right: the content question, the acquisition question, and the defences question. It evaluates how the judges’ approach to defining the content of a lease as a property right may have been affected by the presence of statutory protection. The courts’ approach to the content of a lease may be shaped by the fact that, if B has such a right, he or she may qualify (or have qualified) for significant statutory protection. It also considers the impact of the requirement that a lease must have a certain term. The chapter also considers the debate as to the contractual or proprietary nature of the lease.

The Politics of the Sharing Economy

2020 ◽  
pp. 21-36
Author(s):  
David Murillo
Keyword(s):  
Venture Capital ◽  
Business Model ◽  
Private Equity ◽  
Sharing Economy ◽  
Moving Target ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Platform Economy ◽  
Academic Debate

The current academic debate on the sharing economy (SE) seems to embrace three main discussions: its definition, its effects, and the role of regulation. A neglected topic here seems to be analyzing the specific implications of the changing nature of these firms boosted by private equity and venture capital. As the author points out, we need to analyze not only the impact of a changing business model but, specifically, how stakeholders, cities, and regulators should approach this moving target now called SE. In the following sections the author departs from a traditional definition of the sharing economy to start building the case for treating the SE at large as an epiphenomenon of the platform economy, and as a temporary condition based on a moveable business model. The chapter closes by introducing the regulatory hurdles that come associated with the previous and mapping out its different futures.

The Influence of Dynamic Perspectives on Poverty Analysis and Anti-Poverty Policy in the UK

2004 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 395-416 ◽  
Author(s):  
PETE ALCOCK
Keyword(s):  
Dynamic Analysis ◽  
Social Relations ◽  
Longitudinal Research ◽  
Policy Intervention ◽  
Structure And Agency ◽  
Dynamic Perspective ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Academic Debate

This article provides an overview of the academic debates and recent research on the dynamic perspective on poverty and anti-poverty policy. Renewed theoretical interest in dynamic analysis is discussed in the context of the more general debate about the roles of structure and agency in social relations. This is followed by a brief outline of some of the new empirical datasets now available for longitudinal research, in particular in the UK. The implications of dynamic analysis for our understanding of poverty are summarised, followed by a discussion of the impact of this on anti-poverty policy, again drawing largely on the UK, and some specifically English, developments. The article concludes that dynamic analysis and the role of agency has had a significant impact on both academic debate and policy intervention on poverty, but that this should not be interpreted as leading to an abandonment of policies for structural reform aimed at redistributing resources to the poor.

6. Equitable interests

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ben McFarlane ◽  
Nicholas Hopkins ◽  
Sarah Nield
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Third Parties ◽  
Property Right ◽  
Personal Rights ◽  
Academic Debate

All books in this flagship series contain carefully selected substantial extracts from key cases, legislation, and academic debate, providing able students with a stand-alone resource. This chapter explores the content of equitable interests in land, and considers how such rights differ from each of personal rights and legal estates and interests. Equitable interests in land are capable of being asserted against third parties. They have a power lacking in personal rights. The content and acquisition questions are answered differently depending on whether B claims a legal or equitable property right. It is noted that equitable interest in land depends on A's coming under a duty to B. Moreover, as observed, equitable property rights are conceptually different from legal property rights.

6. Equitable Interests

Land Law ◽  
2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ben McFarlane ◽  
Nicholas Hopkins ◽  
Sarah Nield
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Third Parties ◽  
Property Right ◽  
Personal Rights ◽  
Academic Debate

All books in this flagship series contain carefully selected substantial extracts from key cases, legislation, and academic debate, providing able students with a stand-alone resource.This chapter explores the content of equitable interests in land, and considers how such rights differ from each of personal rights and legal estates and interests. Equitable interests in land are capable of being asserted against third parties. They have a power lacking in personal rights. The content and acquisition questions are answered differently depending on whether B claims a legal or equitable property right. It is noted that equitable interests in land depend on A’s coming under a duty to B. Moreover, as observed, equitable property rights are conceptually different from legal property rights.

6. Equitable Interests

2021 ◽  
pp. 172-193
Author(s):  
Ben McFarlane ◽  
Nicholas Hopkins ◽  
Sarah Nield
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Third Parties ◽  
Property Right ◽  
Personal Rights ◽  
Academic Debate

All books in this flagship series contain carefully selected substantial extracts from key cases, legislation, and academic debate, providing able students with a stand-alone resource. This chapter explores the content of equitable interests in land, and considers how such rights differ from personal rights and also from legal estates and interests. Equitable interests in land are capable of being asserted against third parties and so differ from personal rights. The content and acquisition questions are answered differently, depending on whether B claims a legal or an equitable property right. It is also noted that, in general, equitable interests in land, unlike legal estates and interests, do not bind strangers who interfere with the land. Equitable interests also depend on A’s coming under a duty to B. It is therefore suggested that equitable property rights are conceptually different from legal property rights.

7. Personal Rights: Licences

2021 ◽  
pp. 194-244
Author(s):  
Ben McFarlane ◽  
Nicholas Hopkins ◽  
Sarah Nield
Keyword(s):  
Property Right ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Personal Rights ◽  
Distinct Property ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Academic Debate

All books in this flagship series contain carefully selected substantial extracts from key cases, legislation, and academic debate, providing able students with a stand-alone resource. This chapter presents a discussion of licences. Licences can be grouped into a number of categories, including bare licences, contractual licences, estoppel licences, statutory licences, and licences coupled with an interest. The key feature of a bare licence is that A is under no duty to B not to revoke the licence. The distinction between a bare licence and a contractual licence turns on the question of whether A is under a contractual duty to B. An estoppel licence, as well as a statutory licence, is similar to a contractual licence: the key difference is the source of A’s duty to B. A ‘licence coupled with an interest’ is a permission to make a particular use of A’s land, which arises as part of a distinct property right held by B in A’s land. The chapter considers the impact of all these forms of licences, looking at the positions of A, of X (a stranger who interferes with the land), and of C (a party who acquires a right in the land from A). It considers whether particular forms of licence ought to count as equitable interests in land. It also examines when a licensee may be protected by a new, direct right against a third party, even though the licence itself is only a personal right.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document