Property Law – “Seminar” 2.1

Property Law – “Seminar” 2.1

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
PROPERTY LAW – “SEMINAR” 2.1 INTRODUCTION TO PROPERTY RIGHTS We possess rights in a thing/land, as there is a relationship between that thing and the owner. Allodidal system Tenures of estates – Where we hold certain rights in property. Where there is a relationship in the holders of those rights and property. Introductory concepts Real property = Land Personal property = goods (chattels) Possession o A person in possession of land or goods, even wrongly, is entitled to take action against anyone who seeks to interfere with that possession except where that person can show they have a superior right of possession. Thus we own property until someone comes along with a better claim to obtain that property. For land, we have a central registry where all the land in an area has the details of recorded ownership in relation to land. o Such a person with possession is to: Have control over that thing, with Intent to possess that thing. o Key concept in property law-basis in feudal system of tenure Ownership o Possession is a right that can be granted by an owner to someone else o Ownership is all rights in relation to lands or goods. Rights of ownership includes right to possess, to use, manage and enjoy, the right to income, the right to alienate, (by sale, lease, mortgage or gift) – This is the bundle of rights. Distinction between property and non-property rights Davis v Commonwealth o Sued by Davis and two other people due to certain provisions in the Bicentennial Act were beyond the power of the Commonwealth to exercise which prevented Davis and two others from selling shirts in support for aboriginals due to the use of a symbol under trademark.
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
o Established that there are no property rights in common words or phrases. o It is possible to have property rights in a trademark, but held that cannot hold similar property rights in common words or phrases. o Taylor had owned land nearby where he built a platform where he was able to spectate the races from his land and broadcast the details by radio. o Argued that there are no property rights in a spectacle. The counter-argument was that Taylor was creating a nuisance by interfering with the use and enjoyment of their land, but the courts did not accept it. o Courts stated that the Ps should have protected their interest by building a higher fence to prevent others seeing. o In this case, a property was owned, which was near a racecourse. He built a tower and could watch the races from that tower. o There was no right to hold the spectacle of that race. Kent v Johnson o In this case, in Canberra there is a view of Black Mountain. Kent argued that the appreciation of the view was being spoilt by the construction of a tower in the way, but the Kent didn’t possess any property right of what other people that affect Kent’s view did. o
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Page1 / 10

Property Law – “Seminar” 2.1

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online