DOCSLIB.ORG

Easements, Covenants and Profits À Prendre Consultation Analysis

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Easements, Covenants and Profits À Prendre Consultation Analysis Easements, Covenants and Profits à Prendre Consultation Analysis Consultation Paper No 186 (Consultation Analysis) 8 June 2011 MAKING LAND WORK: EASEMENTS, COVENANTS AND PROFITS À PRENDRE CONSULTATION ANALYSIS This document analyses the responses of consultees to the Law Commission’s Consultation Paper, Easements, Covenants and Profits à Prendre (Law Com Consultation Paper No 186). This analysis of responses is designed to be read in conjunction with the Law Commission’s Report, Making Land Work: Easements, Covenants and Profits à Prendre (Law Com No 327), available at http://www.justice.gov.uk/lawcommission/easements.htm. CONTENTS Page Part 1: Introduction 2 Part 3: Characteristics of easements 6 Part 4: Creation of easements 21 Part 5: Extinguishment of easements 84 Part 6: Profits à prendre 102 Part 7: Covenants: the case for reform 107 Part 8: Land Obligations: characteristics and creation 119 Part 9: Land Obligations: enforceability 165 Part 10: Land Obligations: variation or extinguishment 191 Part 11: Land Obligations: relationship with commonhold 205 Part 12: Land Obligations: supplementary provisions 208 Part 13: Transitional arrangements and the problem of obsolete restrictive covenants 214 Part 14: Section 84 of the Law of Property Act 1925: discharge and modification 222 Part 15: Maintaining the distinction between easements, profits and Land Obligations 253 1 PART 1 INTRODUCTION We would welcome the views of consultees on the human rights implications of the provisional proposals described in this paper. [paragraphs 1.29 and 16.2] 1.1 26 consultees replied to this question, and most had no misgivings about the human rights implications of our proposals. 1.2 Following the enactment of the Human Rights Act 1998, all domestic legislation must be compliant with the rights enunciated in the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Of these rights, two are most likely to be in issue in the context of this project. 1.3 The most pertinent is Article 1 of the First Protocol to the Convention, which states: Every natural or legal person is entitled to the peaceful enjoyment of his possessions. No one shall be deprived of his possessions except in the public interest and subject to the conditions provided for by law and by the general principles of international law. The preceding provisions shall not, however, in any way impair the right of a State to enforce such laws as it deems necessary to control the use of property in accordance with the general interest or to secure the payment of taxes or other contributions or penalties. Although the second part of this Article does allow the state to intervene in order to control the exercise of property rights, the European Court of Human Rights has developed a “fair balance” test which must be met in order to justify any such intervention. This broadly requires that a property owner should not be not subject to an “individual and excessive burden” which should instead have been shared by the affected community, and that measures are proportionate to the aims sought. 1.4 In addition, the European Convention on Human Rights also guarantees procedural rights, which are found in Article 6. That article states: In the determination of his civil rights and obligations or of any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law. Judgment shall be pronounced publicly but the press and public may be excluded from all or part of the trial in the interest of morals, public order or national security in a democratic society, where the interests of juveniles or the protection of the private life of the parties so require, or to the extent strictly necessary in the opinion of the court in special circumstances where publicity would prejudice the interests of justice. 2 This article has to be complied with in respect of any recommendations we make which would have procedural implications. We have had it in mind when formulating our recommendations for reform of the jurisdiction of the Lands Chamber of the Upper Tribunal. The responses 1.5 A number of consultees stated either that our proposals raised no human rights issues, or that they were human rights compliant. For instance, Jeffrey Shaw (Nether Edge Law) said: I do not believe that there are any human rights implications. In fact, the position would be considerably improved in that context by the certainty and clarity that modernised statutory provisions bring to easements and covenants. In a similar vein, the Council for Licensed Conveyancers stated that: The CLC believes that the human rights implications have been adequately considered by the Commission in Part 13 and agree with its conclusions. 1.6 A few consultees felt that certain proposals would also have a positive effect on human rights by adding certainty to the law. Dr Martin Dixon (Queens’ College, University of Cambridge) commented that: In so far as the law of prescription might be clarified, this could have a positive human rights impact, making it more certain when an owner of land might find his/her ownership compromised through use by another. 1.7 On the other hand, a number of consultees identified potential issues. Gregory Hill (Barrister, Ten Old Square Chambers) stated that, whilst he “would expect sensible reform applicable to future transactions to be within ‘the margin of appreciation’”, he could conceive that: Any root-and-branch reform of the law applicable to existing restrictive covenants would engage Protocol 1 Article 1 if it automatically deprived owners with the benefit of existing covenants of the ability to enforce them; and since one of the main defects of that branch of the law is the difficulty of tracing “who has the benefit” (so that those who believe they may be covenant beneficiaries only bestir themselves when an infringing development is being proposed), it seems eminently possible that any such claims under article 1 would be capable of “coming out of the woodwork” for decades or even centuries. 1.8 Trowers & Hamlins had a more specific concern: 3 We are not convinced that the balance between the rights of those who own corporeal property subject to incorporeal property in it and those who own incorporeal property have been fairly struck, and find it difficult to see why the rights of owners of the former should be preferred over the latter. We think that the law should afford equal protection to the property owner regardless of whether the extent of his property is limited by incorporeal rights or is itself incorporeal. 1.9 Additional registration requirements were also identified as potentially creating human rights issues. Dr Martin Dixon (Queens’ College, University of Cambridge) said: It is difficult to envisage how reform could have a negative impact in terms of human rights, unless the proposals resulted in existing owners of dominant titles losing their easements/profits through a disproportionate and retrospective obligation to (say) register an existing easement where no such obligation currently exists. Conclusion 1.10 We have had human rights issues in mind when formulating our recommendations, and have been alive to consultees’ concerns. We have approached the subject of reforming existing restrictive covenants with particular care. We have avoided making recommendations with retrospective effect, and have given particular attention to the need to ensure that existing rights are not jeopardised and that balances already struck in the law are not disturbed. Although the introduction of land obligations as legal interests in lands (outlined in Part 6 of the Report) will create additional registration requirements on parties to the transaction on their creation, these will not affect any existing rights. 1.11 Most consultees’ comments about human rights implications were expressed in the context of specific questions. We address these questions when they arise in the course of this Analysis. 4 We would welcome any information or views from consultees about the likely impact of our provisional proposals. [paragraphs 1.34 and 16.3] 1.12 We have received a great deal of assistance from consultees in assessing the impact of our proposals, for which we are very grateful. The information that they provided is summarised in our formal Impact Assessment, available on our website at http://www.justice.gov.uk/lawcommission/easements.htm. 5 PART 3 CHARACTERISTICS OF EASEMENTS Our provisional view is that the current requirement that an easement be attached to a dominant estate in the land serves an important purpose and should be retained. We do not believe that easements in gross should be recognised as interests in land. Do consultees agree? If they do not agree, could they explain what kinds of right they believe should be permitted by law to be created in gross? [paragraphs 3.18 and 16.4] 3.1 Currently it is not possible to have an easement over someone else’s land without also holding land that benefits from the easement. By contrast, profits à prendre (which we call “profits” in the remainder of this document) can be held “in gross”, that is, without associated land. We explained at paragraphs 3.11 to 3.17 of the Consultation Paper (“CP”) why we did not propose to extend to easements the potential for rights to be held in gross. 3.2 39 consultees responded to this question, with the majority expressing agreement with the provisional view that easements in gross should not be recognised. The responses 3.3 Consultees justified their support for our policy on a number of grounds, of which the most common was a lack of convincing arguments for recognising a new type of proprietary right. Gregory Hill (Barrister, Ten Old Square Chambers) commented: I see no need to alter the existing law.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 7 - Interests in Land - Easements
    7 - INTERESTS IN LAND - EASEMENTS Definition An easement confers the right to use the land of another in some way, or to prevent it being used in a certain way. Examples are a right of way and a right of light. A legal easement is not merely a right in personam but in rem; it permanently binds the land over which it is exercisable and permanently avails the land which it benefits. Characteristics of an Easement The following 4 essential must be present in order for an easement to exist Re Ellenborough Park [1956] Ch 131: - there must be a dominant and servient tenement; i.e. one plot of land must have the benefit of the right and another plot must have the burden, it cannot exist independently of the ownership of land, an easement must be appurtenant (attached) to a dominant tenement and will pass on a transfer of the land - S.187 LPA 1925. - the right must accommodate the dominant land i.e. it must be of benefit to the land and not for example a personal right granted to its owner Hill v Tupper(1863) 2 H&C 121 - the dominant and servient tenements must not be both owned and occupied by the same person, note quasi-easements under Wheeldon v Burrows [1879] 12 Ch D 31; London v Blenheim Estates Ltd v Ladbroke Retail Parks Ltd (1993) - the right claimed must be capable of forming the subject matter of a grant i.e. of being granted by deed and therefore (i) There must be both a capable grantor and grantee.
    [Show full text]
  • Bachelor of Arts in Law & Accounting
    Undergraduate Law Student Handbook LLB Law Plus BA Law & Accounting LLB in Law (Graduate Entry) BA Applied Policing & Criminal Justice Academic Year 2018/2019 1 CONTENTS CONTENTS......................................................................................................................................................... 2 FOREWORD ....................................................................................................................................................... 3 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................................. 4 CONTACTS ......................................................................................................................................................... 6 STAFF PROFILES ............................................................................................................................................. 8 UNDERGRADUATE DEGREE PROGRAMMES .................................................................................... 19 BACHELOR OF LAWS (LAW PLUS) (LM029) .................................................................................... 19 BACHELOR OF ARTS IN LAW & ACCOUNTING (LM020) ............................................................. 32 LLB GRADUATE ENTRY PROGRAMME ............................................................................................... 34 BA IN APPLIED POLICING AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE ....................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Rights to Light Consultation
    Law Commission Consultation Paper No 210 RIGHTS TO LIGHT A Consultation Paper ii THE LAW COMMISSION – HOW WE CONSULT About the Law Commission: The Law Commission was set up by section 1 of the Law Commissions Act 1965 for the purpose of promoting the reform of the law. The Law Commissioners are: The Rt Hon Lord Justice Lloyd Jones, Chairman, Professor Elizabeth Cooke, David Hertzell, Professor David Ormerod and Frances Patterson QC. The Chief Executive is Elaine Lorimer. Topic of this consultation: This Consultation Paper examines the law as it relates to rights to light. Rights to light are a type of easement which entitle a benefited owner to receive light to his or her windows over a neighbour’s land. We discuss the current law and set out a number of provisional proposals and questions on which we would appreciate consultees’ views. Geographical scope: This Consultation Paper applies to the law of England and Wales. Impact assessment: In Chapter 1 of this Consultation Paper we ask consultees to provide evidence in respect of a number of issues relating to rights to light, such as the costs of engaging in rights to light disputes. Any evidence that we receive will assist us in the production of an impact assessment and will inform our final recommendations for reform. Availability of materials: The consultation paper is available on our website at http://lawcommission.justice.gov.uk/consultations/rights-to-light.htm. Duration of the consultation: We invite responses from 18 February 2013 to 16 May 2013. Comments may be sent: By email to [email protected] OR By post to Nicholas Macklam, Law Commission, Steel House, 11 Tothill Street, London SW1H 9LJ Tel: 020 3334 0200 / Fax: 020 3334 0201 If you send your comments by post, it would be helpful if, whenever possible, you could also send them electronically (for example, on CD or by email to the above address, in any commonly used format).
    [Show full text]
  • Easements Across Seven Jurisdictions Within Property
    www.theblackletter.co.uk!1 www.theblackletter.co.ukNeil Egan-Ronayne www.theblackletter.co.ukDecember 2015 Property Law Implied Easements Gerry has been in possession of a registered fee simple estate or ‘freehold’ estate since September 1990. Barton (Construction) Ltd were the registered owners of the unadopted service road that runs along the rear of Gerry’s property up until March 2015 whereupon Barton (Construction) Ltd sold the road to Hyde Ltd as part of a land package. Hyde Ltd has since established a business operation that uses the service road for access. As part of that process they have also erected a lockable gate across the public highway end of the road that is only accessible by using keys held by their employees. Gerry has for a continuous period used the service road in order to park his car and by assumption it is understood that Gerry does not park on the service road itself rather he uses it only as a means of access. When considering Gerry’s position in relation to his denial of access to the service road it would be prudent to refer to the common law position on easements.1 For an easement to be legally considered there are a number of criteria first established in Re Ellenborough Park2 which when met permit such a justification: I. A dominant tenement3 and a servient tenement burdened by the easement must be shown to exist. II. The easement must benefit the dominant tenement. III. The dominant and servient tenements must fall under different ownership.4 IV.
    [Show full text]
  • Making Land Work
    73991 Cover_Cover 25/05/2011 11:54 Page 1 Law Commission Reforming the law Making Land Work: Easements, Covenants and Profits à Prendre Law Commission Making Land Work: Easements, Covenants and Profits à Prendre Easements, Covenants and Profits Making Land Work: Published by TSO (The Stationery Office) and available from: Online www.tsoshop.co.uk Mail, telephone, fax and email TSO PO Box 29, Norwich NR3 1GN Telephone orders/general enquiries: 0870 600 5522 Order through the Parliamentary Hotline Lo-Call 0845 7 023474 Fax orders: 0870 600 5533 Email: [email protected] Textphone: 0870 240 3701 The Parliamentary Bookshop 12 Bridge Street, Parliament Square, Law Com No 327 London SW1A 2JX Telephone orders/general enquiries: 020 7219 3890 Fax orders: 020 7219 3866 Email: [email protected] Internet: http://www.bookshop.parliament.uk TSO@Blackwell and other accredited agents Customers can also order publications from: TSO Ireland 16 Arthur Street, Belfast BT1 4GD Telephone orders/general enquiries: 028 9023 8451 Fax orders: 028 9023 5401 Law Com No 327 12529 HC 1067 Cover / sig1 plateA The Law Commission (LAW COM No 327) MAKING LAND WORK: EASEMENTS, COVENANTS AND PROFITS À PRENDRE Presented to Parliament pursuant to section 3(2) of the Law Commissions Act 1965 Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed on 7 June 2011 HC 1067 London: The Stationery Office £37.00 © Crown copyright 2011 You may re-use this information (excluding logos) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence. To view this licence, visit http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/ or e-mail: [email protected].
    [Show full text]
  • A Brief Guide to English Land Law Land Law Is Concerned with The
    A Brief Guide to English Land Law Land Law is concerned with the legal relationships that people have with regard to land and affects each one of us in many ways in the course of our daily lives. Matters such as the basis upon which we reside in our own homes, access to our place of education or employment and even a visit to the shops or to the home of a friend can all raise issues directly related to land law. There are three main areas to be considered, having first established an answer to the question "What is 'land'?" Firstly, what are the various types of interest that can be acquired in land and by what means may one acquire these interests? Secondly, once acquired, how may these interests be retained and protected? Lastly, how may interests such as these be effectively transferred? Land Law provides us with the legal framework within which to determine these issues. Whether Roman practices with regard to land transactions survived in Northern Europe is a controversial question. It has recently been argued that charters from as far north as modern Belgium from the seventh to the ninth centuries show traces of Roman conveyancing practices. In the case of England, however, we can be reasonably confident that all knowledge of Roman conveyancing practices was lost in the centuries that followed the Anglo-Saxon invasions (fifth and sixth centuries). When the Anglo-Saxons began to book land transactions in the seventh century, that practice represented a new beginning, although it may have been a beginning that was influenced by surviving Roman practices on the Continent.
    [Show full text]
  • Routes to Qualification As a Jersey Solicitor Or Advocate
    April 2016 (4th edn) ROUTES TO QUALIFICATION AS A JERSEY SOLICITOR OR JERSEY ADVOCATE If you aspire to qualify as a lawyer in Jersey, the steps set out below are a guide to how to achieve this. By ‘qualify’ we mean become an advocate or solicitor of the Royal Court of Jersey. It is important to remember that many people work in a variety of roles in Jersey law offices without formally qualifying as a Jersey advocate or solicitor. There are two kinds of qualified Jersey lawyers, regulated by the Advocates and Solicitors (Jersey) Law 1997. Jersey advocates have rights of audience before the Magistrate’s Court, the Royal Court and the Jersey Court of Appeal whereas Jersey solicitors do not (though they may represent clients in the Petty Debts Court and appear in summonses before the Greffier, the Master and the Registrars of the Family Division). Apart from this, there is little difference between the two branches of the legal profession: both take the same Jersey law exams; both may become partners in law firms; and both often do similar kinds of work for clients on a day-to-day basis. A person who qualifies as a Jersey solicitor is eligible to become a Jersey advocate after practising for three years without the need to take any further examinations. These notes have been prepared by the Institute of Law for general information; detailed questions about particular matters (e.g. whether your law degree is recognised as satisfying the academic stage) should be addressed to the Deputy Bailiff’s Office.
    [Show full text]
  • SCOTLAND 1. Real Property
    UK: SCOTLAND Kenneth G C Reid Professor of Property Law, University of Edinburgh and a Scottish Law Commissioner1 1. Real Property Law – Introduction 1.1 General Features and Short History The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland comprises one state, four countries and three jurisdictions. The jurisdictions are (i) England and Wales (ii) Scotland and (iii) Northern Ireland. Each jurisdiction has its own courts, its own lawyers, and its own law. The state has a common parliament (the House of Commons and House of Lords), a common executive, and a common supreme court (the House of Lords), all based in London. But in recent years there has been administrative and legislative devolution both to Scotland and to Northern Ireland. A separate parliament for Scotland was established in 1999, with power to legislate on most areas of private law.2 The union between Scotland and England took place in 1707.3 Before then the countries were separate states. In the medieval period the laws of Scotland and England had many points in common. In particu- lar the feudal system of land tenure, which reached England with the Norman Conquest in 1066, was introduced to Scotland in the course of the twelfth century. From the sixteenth century onwards, how- ever, there was a substantial reception of Roman law in Scotland (but not, on the whole, in England). In Scotland, as in many other European countries, the jurists of the ius commune were studied, and their writings applied in the courts. National legal education did not begin properly in Scotland until the early eighteenth century, and before that time law students from Scotland often studied in the universities of Europe, at first mainly in France and, after the Reformation, in the Netherlands.
    [Show full text]
  • The Nature of Land Ownership and the Protection of the Purchaser
    Afe Babalola University: Journal of Sustainable Development Law and Policy Vol. 1 Iss. 1 (2013) pp. 1-20 THE NATURE OF LAND OWNERSHIP AND THE PROTECTION OF THE PURCHASER Clement C Chigbo* ABSTRACT This article examines the nature of ownership of land and derivative or subordinate real- rights under English law drawing some comparison with Romanic-Dutch ownership while arguing that the Anglo-American estate’ or interest’ in land is a mere semantic conundrum. It is the position of this writer that the concept of ownership in English law of real property, which dominantly influences our real property law in Nigeria and other common law jurisdictions such as the Bahamas and Jamaica, has not brought the desirable clarity to our real property jurisprudence/practice in Nigeria. The unfortunate problems faced by purchasers of real estate in some common law jurisdiction are also briefly examined in this article. The article seeks to advance a solution to these problems and in this context the writer strongly suggests that a land registration system of some model should be adopted in Nigeria and the Bahamas to protect purchasers of real estates and guarantee greater security of title and clarity in our conveyancing practice. INTRODUCTION Land is elemental. It is where life begins and it is where life ends. Land provides the physical substratum for human activity; it is the essential base of all social and commercial interaction. Land law is, accordingly, that part of the law which governs the allocation of rights and obligations in relation to ‘real’ or ‘immovable’ property. We spend scarcely a moment out of contact with terra firma and our very existence is constantly sustained and shaped by the natural and constructed world around us.
    [Show full text]
  • 'Legal Educator As Translator: a Critical Reflection'
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Middlesex University Research Repository ‘Legal Educator as Translator: a critical reflection’ Submitted to Middlesex University in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Professional Studies by Public Works Elliot J. Schatzberger BA(Hons), PGDipLaw, Barrister-at-Law Date of submission: May 2018 1 Disclaimer: The views expressed in this research project are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the supervisory team, Middlesex University, or the examiners of this work Elliot Schatzberger May 2018 Middlesex University 2 Acknowledgements and thanks Firstly, I would like to express my heartfelt thanks to my supervisor Dr Kate Maguire for her insight, encouragement and guidance. Kate not only enabled me to ‘see the light’ in relation to critical reflection but also helped me to create a work which seeks to show that it is possible to transform the horrific into a creative, dynamic action that is a tangible demonstration that the darkness of 20th Century Fascism did not win. I would also like to thank my Head of Department and doctoral consultant Professor Laurent Pech for his tireless support and allowing me the time to make this project happen; to my colleague, mentor and friend Dr Lilian Miles for helping me see through the lens and to my colleague and friend Susan Scott-Hunt for sowing the seed which was the genesis of this work. I would also like to thank my amazing wife Ewa and our incredible Emilia for their love, support and patience.
    [Show full text]
  • Downloaded 2021-09-29T07:23:19Z
    Provided by the author(s) and University College Dublin Library in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite the published version when available. Title Legal Education in Ireland: A Paradigm Shift to the Practical? Authors(s) Paris, Marie-Luce; Donnelly, Lawrence Publication date 2010 Publication information German Law Journal, 11 (9): 1067-1092 Publisher Washington & Lee University. School of Law Link to online version http://www.germanlawjournal.com/index.php?pageID=11&artID=1284 Item record/more information http://hdl.handle.net/10197/5981 Downloaded 2021-09-29T07:23:19Z The UCD community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters! (@ucd_oa) © Some rights reserved. For more information, please see the item record link above. Published in (2010) German Law Journal , 11 (9):1067-1092 LEGAL E DUCATION IN I RELAND : A P ARADIGM S HIFT TO THE P RACTICAL ? Abstract – Irish legal education is under increasing pressure to reform and reinvent itself in the face of various challenges, especially those implied by the Bologna process. In line with two of the main priorities of the process, namely employability and student-centred learning, a growing number of Irish law faculties have incorporated, or are planning to incorporate, more practice-related components into the law curriculum and, in some cases, a fully fledged Clinical Legal Education programme. This is an important shift in the paradigm of legal education in Ireland which should be welcomed and encouraged by all stakeholders – students, academics, practitioners, judges and those involved in myriad capacities in the administration of justice.
    [Show full text]
  • Historiography and the Law of Property Act 1925: the Return of Frankenstein
    The University of Manchester Research Historiography and the Law of Property Act 1925: the return of Frankenstein DOI: 10.1017/S0008197318000697 Document Version Accepted author manuscript Link to publication record in Manchester Research Explorer Citation for published version (APA): Roche, J. (2018). Historiography and the Law of Property Act 1925: the return of Frankenstein. The Cambridge Law Journal. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0008197318000697 Published in: The Cambridge Law Journal Citing this paper Please note that where the full-text provided on Manchester Research Explorer is the Author Accepted Manuscript or Proof version this may differ from the final Published version. If citing, it is advised that you check and use the publisher's definitive version. General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the Research Explorer are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. Takedown policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please refer to the University of Manchester’s Takedown Procedures [http://man.ac.uk/04Y6Bo] or contact [email protected] providing relevant details, so we can investigate your claim. Download date:28. Sep. 2021 HISTORIOGRAPHY AND THE LAW OF PROPERTY ACT 1925: THE RETURN OF FRANKENSTEIN JUANITA ROCHE* [forthcoming in the Cambridge Law Journal, 2018] ABSTRACT: This article considers how problems in legal historiography can lead to real legal problems, through a case-study of two recent judgments which appear to revolutionise the law on overreaching under s.2(1)(ii) Law of Property Act 1925.
    [Show full text]