1,721,186 research outputs found
Hopkins (Nicholas S.) Ibrahim (Saad Eddin) eds Arab Society
No full textElboudradi Hassan. Hopkins (Nicholas S.) Ibrahim (Saad Eddin) eds Arab Society. In: Archives de sciences sociales des religions, n°70, 1990. p. 274
Recommended from our members
Conscience, discretion and the creation of property rights
No full textThis paper considers the utility of the concept of conscience or unconscionable conduct as a contemporary rationale for intervention in two principles applied where a person seeks to renege on an informal agreement relating to land: the principle in Rochefoucauld v Boustead; and transfers 'subject to' rights in favour of a claimant. By analysing the concept in light of our current understanding of the nature of judicial discretion and the use of general principles, it responds to arguments that unconscionability is too general a concept on which to base intervention. In doing so, it considers the nature of the discretion that is actually in issue when the court intervenes through conscience in these principles. However, the paper questions the use of constructive trusts as a response to unconscionability. It argues that there is a need, in limited circumstances, to separate the finding of unconscionability from the imposition of a constructive trust. In these limited circumstances, once unconscionability is found, the courts should have a discretion as to the remedy, modelled on that developed in the context of proprietary estoppel. The message underlying this paper is that many of the concerns expressed about unconscionability that have led to suggestions of alternative rationales for intervention can in fact be addressed whilst retaining an unconscionability analysis. Unconscionability remains a preferable rationale for intervention as it provides a common thread that links apparently separate principles and can assist our understanding of their scope
Recommended from our members
Proprietary estoppel: a functional analysis
No full textThis article argues in favour of a functional analysis of proprietary estoppel which focuses on the role of the doctrine in enabling claims to the informal acquisition of property rights in land. The article shows that adopting such an analysis both assists our understanding of two recent decisions of the English House of Lords and helps to resolve issues of taxonomy that arise in relation to the doctrine. A functional analysis both unites the sub-categories of proprietary estoppel into a single principle and distinguishes this principle from other types of estoppel claim. It is suggested, however, that the unification of common law and equitable estoppel remains both possible and desirable as long as ‘unification’ is understood broadly and is not confined to the recognition of a doctrine that is identical in its scope and operation in all cases. It is further shown that despite a lack of discussion of the concept in the House of Lords, unconscionability continues to play a key role in proprietary estoppel and therefore in the informal acquisition of property rights. Unconscionability may now benefit from a closer connection with the other elements of claims which should prevent abuse of the concept and allay concerns of ‘palm-tree justice’
Recommended from our members
The relevance of context in property law: a case for judicial restraint?
No full textA distinction between the domestic and commercial context is commonly drawn in property law discourse and has been brought into focus by three recent House of Lords decisions. The thesis of this article is that while the distinction is a useful explanatory tool it runs into difficulties when given legal effect by the courts. There is a definitional problem in understanding what is included within each context while the distinction assumes the existence of a dichotomy when in fact the domestic and commercial spheres are better seen as a continuum. In Stack v Dowden the majority of the House of Lords gave context legal effect and considered that different rules should apply to determine ownership of the home. This article locates their decision in the broader debate on judicial restraint and creativity. By analogy with current discussion of due deference in public law it is suggested that, in light of the policy issues involved and the broader ramifications of the decision, insufficient justification was given for the approach adopted by the majority
Hopkins, Nicholas S. - Popular Government in an African Town. Kita, Mali
No full textLallemand Suzanne. Hopkins, Nicholas S. - Popular Government in an African Town. Kita, Mali. In: Cahiers d'études africaines, vol. 14, n°53, 1974. Le problème de la domination étatique au rwanda. histoire et économie. pp. 199-200
Recommended from our members
Low cost home ownership: legal issues of the shared ownership lease.
No full textAnalysis of the decision in Richardson v Midland Heart Ltd (formally Focus Homes Options) [2008] L&TR 3
Recommended from our members
The "value" of property rights in social security law
No full textThis article provides a critical examination of the way that property rules are applied judicially in the context of social security law concerned with the assessment of capital, and especially in connection with the determination of ownership and the valuation of assets, which can have a critical bearing on entitlement to various means-tested benefits
Recommended from our members
Housing or property? The dynamics of housing policy and property principles in the right to buy
No full textThis paper examines the interplay and tension between housing law and policy and property law, in the specific context of the right to buy (RTB). It focuses on funding arrangements between the RTB tenant and another party. It first examines how courts determine the parties' respective entitlements in the home, highlighting the difficulty of categorising, under traditional property law principles, a contribution in the form of the statutory discount conferred on the RTB tenant. Secondly, it considers possible exploitation of the RTB scheme, both at the macro level of exploitation of the policy underpinning the legislation and, at the micro level, of exploitation of the tenant. The measures contained in the Housing Act 2004 intended to curb exploitation of the RTB are analysed to determine what can be considered to be legitimate and illegitimate uses of the scheme. It is argued that, despite the government's implicit approval, certain funding arrangements by non-resident relatives fail to give effect to the spirit of the scheme
- …
