Search

Copyright of Environmental & Social Management Journal / Revista de Gestão Social e Ambiental is the property of Environmental & Social Management Journal and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The digitization of land records is being promoted by the World Bank at scale, especially in developing countries. Efficiently maintaining land records can improve tenure safety and food security, reduce poverty, and aid democratic urbanization. While the 2030 Agenda for sustainable development encourages the use of new technology to administer land, it also forewarns that such initiatives ought to factor in digital divide. These evolving processes tend to have a detrimental impact on the tenure rights of marginalized people who are devoid of both access and understanding of such modernization efforts. Through this paper, we examine digitization and associated land governance processes from a human rights perspective. To bring them to light, we compare digitization initiatives in both India and South Africa and draw lessons from them to address issues of equity, inclusion, and good governance in an increasingly digital world. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Under the doctrine of proprietary estoppel, a promise made to another that they will acquire a right in the promisor's land can give rise to a legal remedy, if the promisee has detrimentally relied on that promise. In Guest v Guest, the Supreme Court was asked to settle a long‐running debate about how judges should go about fashioning that remedy. The Court held that the claimant's award should be whatever is required to alleviate the unconscionability constituted by the promisor's repudiation of their promise. How that is to be determined will vary from case to case, but Guest v Guest makes clear that the starting assumption is that the promise will be enforced. This note sets out the approaches of the majority and the minority, and then discusses a number of issues raised by this decision. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Supreme Court recently handed down its decision in Guest v Guest [2022] UKSC 27. This was an appeal against an award in proprietary estoppel of around £1.3 million. A proprietary estoppel claim requires detrimental reliance on a promise to grant the claimant an interest in land. This generates an 'equity', which enables the court to fashion a remedy to cure this unconscionable situation: for example, an order to transfer the promised interest to the claimant, or an order to pay a monetary equivalent of what the claimant expected. The doctrine has been relied upon in media-friendly cases where claimants had worked on their family farms for low or no pay for many years on the expectation of an inheritance and ended up being cut out of that inheritance. Lord Briggs, for the majority, favoured enforcing the promise as a starting point while allowing for variation where 'real-life problems' warranted it. He held that the claimant should have what he expected but, in a novel approach, gave the defendants an entitlement to choose between two forms of relief. Lord Leggatt, dissenting, held that the remedial aim was to do only what was necessary to prevent detriment to the claimant. On his view, compensating the claimant's reliance loss would be sufficient for this, and, in that regard, he did not factor in lost opportunities. This was a narrow scope to adopt, and the majority judgment is more likely to provide redress for the loss of important life opportunities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In Hong Kong law, the courts have always declined to introduce the remedial constructive trust device, characterising it as a moot point or as a device that does not exist in Hong Kong. However, the most recent Court of Final Appeal (CFA) decision in Cheung Lai Mui v Cheung Wai Shing [2021] HKCFA l 9 deviated hom the foregoing attitude to Temedial constructive trusts. It recognised "unconscionability" as the basis of relief, demonstrating the departure of Hong Kong law from the principles of proprietary estoppel currently applied in the English law. Contrary to the English approach of minimum equity to do justice, the exercise of broad discretion by the CFA in Cheung Lai Mui was more similar to the Australian approach to proprietaTy estoppel remedies. This case note analyses the reasons why the CFA adopted the remedial constructive trust approach in Cheung Lai Mui, as well as the problems that arise Fom the adoption of such an approach in Hong Kong law. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article seeks to demonstrate that under the LTA there are no impediments to the satisfaction of an equity based on a claim in proprietary estoppel and its enforceability against third parties. That there are problems in these two respects is misconceived in light of case law and the relevant statutory provisions in the LTA. As for the satisfaction of the equity, it is argued that a principled approach must be adopted notwithstanding the wide discretion conferred on the courts on the matter. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

According to Giumelli v Giumelli (1999) 196 CLR 101, where A successfully makes out a proprietary estoppel claim, courts must positively exercise two sets of remedial discretion. The first concerns whether expectation relief is a disproportionate remedy in view of the detriment A suffers. If expectation relief is held to be justified, a second set of discretion obliges judges 'to consider all the circumstances of the case', including 'the impact upon relevant third parties', to decide whether to enforce A's expectations in specie or to provide a monetary award. This article discusses the problems with Giumelli, both as to the principle it propounds and as to its application on the facts. It then introduces a fundamental analytical proposition, concerning the relationship between different types of private law remedies and discretion, and explores the two options available for the future development of proprietary estoppel in Australia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article addresses the remedial approach which ought to be taken in relation to proprietary estoppel, an important matter which Hong Kong courts have yet to address explicitly. Drawing from the divergent experiences of England, Australia and Singapore, it makes two central points. First, the provision of expectation relief, as opposed to compensation for reliance loss (the "minimum equity" approach) ought to be adopted as a weak starting point for analysis. Second, to say that "expectation relief' is the starting point should be taken to mean that the claimant's expectation will prima facie be enforced in specie, as opposed simply to a prima facie award of the monetary value of the claimant's expectation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this study is to further investigate the concept of the weakening of a right in the field of property law. The weakening of a right is applied by reference to the particular circumstances of a case, including an unreasonable and unexplained long period of plaintiff's delay in exercising his/her right, which causally prejudices the defendant's position. The analysis of the conditions and consequences of the weakening of a right is undertaken on the basis of the doctrine and case law of the Greek and Cypriot property law, in order to identify in a comparative law way the dynamic elements of each individual legal order and to shed light on the process of using the findings in the assessment and handling of real life cases covered by the above issue. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In Australia, proprietary estoppel attracts the prima facie remedy of expectation relief. This article argues that this remedial approach can be understood simply as a presumption of fact, providing a practical starting point that reflects the frequency with which cases justifying expectation relief are brought. This understanding of the remedial approach is consistent with the aim of the doctrine, which is (and remains) the avoidance of detriment. The article suggests that the remedial approach does provide, and ought to be understood as providing, only a weak default position. This position encourages judges to be alive to the facts of particular cases in framing the appropriate relief. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses proprietary estoppel and copyright law. Topics include the land law cases that contributed to the development of acquiescence, the complexities involved in the establishment of authorship in copyright cases, and how the courts have determined to use a unifying approach to proprietary estoppel leading to the loss of nuance.

The article focuses on the decision of Australian High Court in the case Crown Melbourne Ltd v Cosmopolitan Hotel (Vic) Pty Ltd on proprietary estoppel based on the decision of Waltons Stores (Interstate) Ltd v Maher and relief sought by the tenants was based on proprietary or promissory estoppel.

The article reports the decision of the Louisiana Supreme Court in the case. The court held that when a landowner knows of another's use of his land and when his silence could be considered neighborly permission, that use is precarious and thus cannot establish a rite of passage by acquisitive prescription.

The article reports the decision of the British High Court of Justice in the case 'National Crime Agency v Robb' on laws related to proprietary relief and equity tracing in the country and discusses the provision of the British Proceeds of Crime Act 2002.

The article looks at decision of Great Britain's High Court in the case Motivate Publishing FZ LLC v Hello Ltd related to the promise principle in the commercial property other than land under the doctrine of proprietary estoppel.

The article looks at the decision of Great Britain's Privy Council in the case Credit Agricole Corp and Investment Bank v Papadimitriou regarding the receipt of funds in breach of trust through a bank account with money laundering.

The article focuses on several court cases related to the proprietary estoppel and the trusts of land which include Ghazaani v Rowshan regarding the transfer a property, Preedy v Dunne on the claim of an estoppel by a beneficiary under a trust of land and Evan Davies v David Davies.

This paper argues that a common theme underpins the doctrines of estoppel by representation and convention, promissory and proprietary estoppel. In each case, it is the law's concern to respond appropriately to, and not to reward, undue risk-taking on the part of claimants in a non-contractual context. In doctrinal terms, this concern is mediated through the common requirement that the claimant must have acted in reasonable reliance on an assumption induced by the defendant. This paper concludes that the way remains open for the development of a coherent and unified doctrine of reliance-based estoppel moulded around the requirement of reasonable reliance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the court case Credit & Mercantile Ltd v Kaymuu Ltd. which could have profound consequences for the Boland principle. Topisc include the case highlighting that an equitable owner cannot set up their interest as an overriding interest against a mortgagee if the interest was not enforceable inter partes immediately before the mortgage, and the case also highlighting that the"consent" or "estoppel" does not have to be given to the mortgagee.

The 'acquiescence' category of proprietary estoppel is a rare example of responsibility for pure omissions in private law. On liberal-individualistic theories of ownership, the policy considerations against liability for nondoing are exceptionally powerful in the context of rights over land. Nevertheless, I argue that in proprietary estoppel the law is justified in imposing a duty on the right-holder to alert a stranger when his actions are based on a mistake. Owners of property rights are under what Honoré termed a 'special duty' to contribute to the social good of efficient market for land by publicising their rights. This 'duty to speak' is however relatively weak and cannot completely suppress considerations against liability for omission. While liability in the acquiescence category can be justified in principle, the current law, in which owners who failed to correct the mistake of the relying party incur similar liability to owners who actively encouraged the other party to rely, is untenable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article looks at the decision of several federal courts in cases involving ethics in land use in the U.S. as of October 2014, which can be used by municipal attorneys for training for members of planning boards, zoning boards, and local legislative bodies . Topics discussed include the New Jersey Municipal Land Use Law, laws related to attorney conflicts of interest, and a New Jersey court decision in "Kane Properties LLC v. City of Hoboken."

"When a person acts in an unconscionable way towards another, how should a court, in seeking to achieve 'practical justice', balance and reconcile values of certainty, consistency arising from precedent, overall coherence in the structure of the law, deference to Parliament on policy issues, and the provision of a remedy appropriate to reverse or prevent harm to the innocent party?". [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the legal rights of unmarried ex-cohabitants in Great Britain as of May 2014, focusing on claims for material relief and the beneficial interests of non-marital couples. Constructive trusts, separation-related contracts, and Great Britain's Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 are mentioned. A proprietary estoppel legal doctrine and several British legal cases are examined, along with Great Britain's Supreme Court and a contract reliance requirement.

The article describes the nature of indefeasible, which is the right in a property that cannot be annulled, and in personam exception, which allows a claimant to bring a personal action against the registered proprietor, present in the Torrens system, a land registration system in which the government is the keeper of all land and title records. It discusses the New South Wales Court of Appeals case Van Dyke v. Sidhu which was concerning a claim for proprietary estoppel.