Property Rights Under Land Laws: The Written and Documented Contracts - Case Study Example

Property rights come under land laws which are enforceable on people indulging in a 'proprietary' transaction. This proprietary nature of land laws is very different from personal nature and legal aspects of law pertaining to other fields where the broad spectrum of law is applicable. The aspects of property law discussed in this case are the legal power or authority of easement, lease and rights of entry, as granted to Rajinder, Imran and Anita. An easement is a document which allows the neighbors or a neighbor to use the property. In this case a positive easement was granted to Rajinder by Zac and Julie, as Rajinder got the right to use the property owned to Zac, Julie. Similarly, a lease is a payment made by a person to the owner of the property for his or her use of the property. In this case, a verbal lease was agreed between Imran and Zac and Julie. We will discuss, how Emile, can treat a verbal lessee, after gaining control of the property in the latter part of this essay. Similarly, this case will also look at the position under which Aunt Mildred is in because her share in the property is not documented and how things could have been different if her share would have been documented. In our case, the relationship between Emile and other stakeholders can be defined with the help of the following diagram: ZAC and JULIE are the landowner and grantor of rights to people like Imran, Rajinder and Aunt Mildred. : Figure 1: Showing the relationship between original owners with the other stakeholders. FIGURE TAKEN FROM: PRICIPLE OF LANDLAW, MARTIN DIXON) The second box shows the name of people who have been granted rights by the property owners, such as lease, easement or deeds. (Dixon, 2006) As a result of establishment of contracts such as lease, easement or deeds, both parties form a legal relationship. Now let's look at what will happen if this property is sold. AFTER THE SALE OF PROPERTY TO EMILE: JULIE AND ZAC sells the property which was registered in their name to Emile. In other words, the rights of ownership of land are transferred from ZAC and JULIE to EMILE. However, even after the ownership of the land has changed, the parties to whom the property rights were granted in the form of lease, easement and deeds remain intact. In other words, it is binding upon EMILE to honour these rights. The proprietary nature of the rights is such that it is enforceable on parties other than the original signatories of these contracts. This relationship is expressed in FIGURE 2. Figure 2: Showing that even after the property has been sold the rights of stakeholders remain intact. (Dixon, 2006) FIGURE TAKEN FROM: PRICIPLE OF LANDLAW, MARTIN DIXON) The rights of leasehold as granted to IMRAN and EASEMENT as granted to RAJINDER is contained in the following clause, which is found under LPA1925, clause s1: "The only interests or charges in or over land which are capable of subsisting or of being conveyed or created at law are: 1) An Easement. 2) A Rentcharge 3) Legal mortgage 4) Rights of entry .."1 (The UK Statute Law Database, 2010) The above clause clearly shows the fact that Imran, Rajindar are going to continue to enjoy these rights provided by the original owners Zac and Julie. These rights are supported by the LAW in section LPA1925.2 However, as far as Aunt Mildred is concerned, she might face difficultly as her name is not registered as partial owner and her share is not documented unlike Zac and Julie. Since, her name is not included as the partial owner of property, she is not the rightful owner of the property and she has not legal rights over the property in legal terms. As a result of this, unless Zac and Julie decide to pay her back, or she hires a tactful lawyer to have her claim over Zac and Julie settled, she enjoys no rights over the property and her share in the property in legal terms is nothing. On the other hand, we can see that even Imran's contract is a verbal lease and no documents are signed for it. Unless Zac and Julie decide to become witness for the contract, it is not binding on Emile to honor the lease contract. Since, the contract is not written, Imran needs to have a witness who will solemn that such a contract took place. Since, the contract was agreed over a phone, only Zac and Julie could witness it. (Mackenzie and Phillips, 2008) As far as Julie's sister rights are concerned, they will remain intact in accordance with LPA1925. As we have seen in the above property Act, that right of entry subsists even after the ownership of the property changes, we can see that Julie's sister Anita can exercise her rights of entry into the property. In the end, we can conclude that it is the written and documented contracts and pieces of information that remain more important than verbal or unwritten contract. In all kinds of law, especially in property law, the claimant needs to have a proper written and document to prove his claims and to prove that his arguments have merit over those of the defendant's. Not having a written record of your share in the property or contracts is a mistake which must be avoided in order to be protected by the legal authority. The UK statue Law Database covers the property rights broadly and legal authority may step in to protect the rights of claimants if they have a valid proof of their interest in the property, which is mainly provided by written contracts or documented share in the property. Looking at our case, we can see that Rajinder and Julie's sister are in a more advantaged position than Imran and Aunt Mildred, as they have their legal documents unlike the latter. References: Blackstones Statues.(2009)Property Law, Thomas, 2009-2010 THE UK STATUE LAW DATABASES (2010).: Retrieved: 2 January 2010. http://www.opsi.gov.uk/RevisedStatutes/Acts/ukpga/1925/cukpga_19250020_en_1 Mackenzie and Phillip. (2008). Land Law. Oxford University Press. Dixon, Martin. (2006). Principles of Land Law. Routledge Cavendish Read More