Pub Date : 2019-07-08DOI: 10.1108/JPPEL-12-2018-0035
E. Toomey
Purpose On 12 November 2018, New Zealand's Land Transfer Act 2017 came into force. The purpose of this paper is to pinpoint some of the significant changes in the Act that challenge the fundamental concepts of the Torrens system of registration. Design/methodology/approach The paper addresses three significant reforms: a definition of land transfer fraud; the concept of immediate indefeasibility with limited judicial discretion and its impact on volunteers and the Gibbs v. Messer anomaly; and the compensation regime. Case studies illustrate the effect of these changes. Findings The limited legislative definition of fraud reflects the common law and allows for any necessary flexibility. The new Act reiterates the principle of immediate indefeasibility but qualifies it with the introduction of some judicial discretion. This is a novel concept for the courts and will undoubtedly be dealt with cautiously. The author voices some disquiet with regard to some of the guidelines set out in s 55(4) of the Act. The compensation provisions introduce an element of an owner's culpability. An owner now runs the risk of reduced compensation if there has been a lack of proper care. Research limitations/implications The implications of this research are fundamental for New Zealand's land transfer system. Practical implications The limited judicial discretion will challenge the courts of New Zealand. The new compensation provisions will ensure that an owner's carelessness will be accountable. Originality/value This study is one of the first to analyse the Land Transfer Act 2017 (New Zealand). Its value extends beyond New Zealand shores as it has implications for global land transfer systems.
{"title":"Reverberations in the Torrens system: a new Land Transfer Act in New Zealand","authors":"E. Toomey","doi":"10.1108/JPPEL-12-2018-0035","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/JPPEL-12-2018-0035","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000Purpose\u0000On 12 November 2018, New Zealand's Land Transfer Act 2017 came into force. The purpose of this paper is to pinpoint some of the significant changes in the Act that challenge the fundamental concepts of the Torrens system of registration.\u0000\u0000\u0000Design/methodology/approach\u0000The paper addresses three significant reforms: a definition of land transfer fraud; the concept of immediate indefeasibility with limited judicial discretion and its impact on volunteers and the Gibbs v. Messer anomaly; and the compensation regime. Case studies illustrate the effect of these changes.\u0000\u0000\u0000Findings\u0000The limited legislative definition of fraud reflects the common law and allows for any necessary flexibility. The new Act reiterates the principle of immediate indefeasibility but qualifies it with the introduction of some judicial discretion. This is a novel concept for the courts and will undoubtedly be dealt with cautiously. The author voices some disquiet with regard to some of the guidelines set out in s 55(4) of the Act. The compensation provisions introduce an element of an owner's culpability. An owner now runs the risk of reduced compensation if there has been a lack of proper care.\u0000\u0000\u0000Research limitations/implications\u0000The implications of this research are fundamental for New Zealand's land transfer system.\u0000\u0000\u0000Practical implications\u0000The limited judicial discretion will challenge the courts of New Zealand. The new compensation provisions will ensure that an owner's carelessness will be accountable.\u0000\u0000\u0000Originality/value\u0000This study is one of the first to analyse the Land Transfer Act 2017 (New Zealand). Its value extends beyond New Zealand shores as it has implications for global land transfer systems.\u0000","PeriodicalId":41184,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Property Planning and Environmental Law","volume":"27 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2019-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73383065","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-07-08DOI: 10.1108/JPPEL-12-2018-0037
David Sawtell
The owner of residential long leasehold can be significantly affected by construction operations to the building, whether during its initial construction or its subsequent repair, renovation or improvement. This paper aims to consider how a leaseholder has an interest in such construction operations and the extent to which this is taken into consideration in their procurement.,The paper is a general review of how construction law interfaces with property law interests, rights and obligations in the case of a residential leaseholder. The first part of the paper outlines the issues raised by construction operations. The second part of the paper queries the efficacy of any right of redress the leaseholder might have in respect of construction defects. The third part considers the limited nature of the leaseholder’s right to be consulted about construction operations. The paper is predominantly doctrinal in approach, although it references socio-legal research. The paper also contrasts the English law position with Australia.,The paper concludes that leaseholders have limited input into the procurement of construction operations despite their interest in them. Property law can be used to regulate construction law operations.,To date, the literature dealing specifically with the position of leaseholders, consultation obligations and construction operations has been limited. This paper brings together property law and construction law in analysing the findings of the Hackitt Report into the Grenfell Tower disaster.
{"title":"The residential leaseholder’s interest in construction operations","authors":"David Sawtell","doi":"10.1108/JPPEL-12-2018-0037","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/JPPEL-12-2018-0037","url":null,"abstract":"The owner of residential long leasehold can be significantly affected by construction operations to the building, whether during its initial construction or its subsequent repair, renovation or improvement. This paper aims to consider how a leaseholder has an interest in such construction operations and the extent to which this is taken into consideration in their procurement.,The paper is a general review of how construction law interfaces with property law interests, rights and obligations in the case of a residential leaseholder. The first part of the paper outlines the issues raised by construction operations. The second part of the paper queries the efficacy of any right of redress the leaseholder might have in respect of construction defects. The third part considers the limited nature of the leaseholder’s right to be consulted about construction operations. The paper is predominantly doctrinal in approach, although it references socio-legal research. The paper also contrasts the English law position with Australia.,The paper concludes that leaseholders have limited input into the procurement of construction operations despite their interest in them. Property law can be used to regulate construction law operations.,To date, the literature dealing specifically with the position of leaseholders, consultation obligations and construction operations has been limited. This paper brings together property law and construction law in analysing the findings of the Hackitt Report into the Grenfell Tower disaster.","PeriodicalId":41184,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Property Planning and Environmental Law","volume":"2 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2019-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74397602","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-07-08DOI: 10.1108/JPPEL-03-2019-0012
Tola Amodu
Purpose The Immigration Act (2014) at Part 3 established a new regime with private landlords incurring penalties (and potentially criminal liability from 1 November 2016) if they allow a person disqualified, by reason of migration status, to reside in a property as their only or main home. Known colloquially as the “right to rent”, the provisions restrict access to accommodation and impose onerous duties on landlords to check tenants’ migration status. The purpose of this paper is to consider how a change in the emphasis of regulation introduced by the provisions, resulted in the coalescence of opposition by landlords and renters in a way that historically would have been unthinkable. Design/methodology/approach Using the lens of Foucault’s governmentality, it is possible to see how Government sought to shift the locus of control from itself to the landlord, which through its legislative and policy stance resulted in such fierce opposition as evidenced by the first instance challenge to the provisions in R (Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants) v SS for the Home Department [2019] EWHC 452 (Admin). Findings The focus of regulation introduced by the provisions resulted in the coalescence of opposition by landlords and renters in a way that historically would have been unthinkable. Landlords and renters are usually thought of as being in opposition, but not so here. This may offer hope for more productive regulatory outcomes where both parties work together. It may also suggest that encroaching on the notion of private rights and interests in law could result in counterproductive consequences. Research limitations/implications Unlike Foucault’s notion of surveillance and control, governmentality shifts the emphasis from a hierarchical conception of government to practices including self (imposed) governance – with here, the landlord being required to act as a proxy for border agents. This suggests that there may exist boundaries beyond which, in a given context, it might be unwise for Government to step without adverse consequences. Foucault’s ideas provide a starting point, but do not give us all of the answers. Practical implications The coalescence of opposing actors can be a significant force to challenge government given the extent of their knowledge of the given context. It may also suggest a route to a more collaborative form of regulation. Originality/value A novel theoretical take on an issue of concern raised by practitioners and interest groups alike.
{"title":"A coalition of the (un)willing?","authors":"Tola Amodu","doi":"10.1108/JPPEL-03-2019-0012","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/JPPEL-03-2019-0012","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000Purpose\u0000The Immigration Act (2014) at Part 3 established a new regime with private landlords incurring penalties (and potentially criminal liability from 1 November 2016) if they allow a person disqualified, by reason of migration status, to reside in a property as their only or main home. Known colloquially as the “right to rent”, the provisions restrict access to accommodation and impose onerous duties on landlords to check tenants’ migration status. The purpose of this paper is to consider how a change in the emphasis of regulation introduced by the provisions, resulted in the coalescence of opposition by landlords and renters in a way that historically would have been unthinkable.\u0000\u0000\u0000Design/methodology/approach\u0000Using the lens of Foucault’s governmentality, it is possible to see how Government sought to shift the locus of control from itself to the landlord, which through its legislative and policy stance resulted in such fierce opposition as evidenced by the first instance challenge to the provisions in R (Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants) v SS for the Home Department [2019] EWHC 452 (Admin).\u0000\u0000\u0000Findings\u0000The focus of regulation introduced by the provisions resulted in the coalescence of opposition by landlords and renters in a way that historically would have been unthinkable. Landlords and renters are usually thought of as being in opposition, but not so here. This may offer hope for more productive regulatory outcomes where both parties work together. It may also suggest that encroaching on the notion of private rights and interests in law could result in counterproductive consequences.\u0000\u0000\u0000Research limitations/implications\u0000Unlike Foucault’s notion of surveillance and control, governmentality shifts the emphasis from a hierarchical conception of government to practices including self (imposed) governance – with here, the landlord being required to act as a proxy for border agents. This suggests that there may exist boundaries beyond which, in a given context, it might be unwise for Government to step without adverse consequences. Foucault’s ideas provide a starting point, but do not give us all of the answers.\u0000\u0000\u0000Practical implications\u0000The coalescence of opposing actors can be a significant force to challenge government given the extent of their knowledge of the given context. It may also suggest a route to a more collaborative form of regulation.\u0000\u0000\u0000Originality/value\u0000A novel theoretical take on an issue of concern raised by practitioners and interest groups alike.\u0000","PeriodicalId":41184,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Property Planning and Environmental Law","volume":"5 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2019-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78663018","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-07-01DOI: 10.1108/JPPEL-10-2018-0032
Andrew Kelly, Jasper Brown, Aaron Strickland
Purpose This paper aims to not only disentangle the recently altered law and policy on coastal management in New South Wales (NSW), Australia, but also raise opportunities for fresh ideas to develop when dealing with both existing and future coastal damage. The focus is on the role of local government which is not only closer to concerned citizens but also faces costal damage on its own doorstep. Design/methodology/approach The paper explores the topic from the beginnings of relevant statutory law to the current situation, supported by a case study. It is transdisciplinary in nature, encompassing land use and coastal legislation. Findings The narrative encourages further attention to the key issues at the local level. This is underpinned by the need for planners to move beyond zoning and other restrictive mechanisms to more strategic approaches. All levels of government must recognise that regulatory planning on its own is insufficient. This leads to the need for champions to consider opportunities beyond the ordinary. Originality/value While this paper will add to a growing literature on coastal damage and action at the local level, its emphasis on the benefits and limitations of the changing statutory system will assist not only policy makers but professional officers at the local forefront.
{"title":"Local government and coastal damage: confusion, potential and dreams","authors":"Andrew Kelly, Jasper Brown, Aaron Strickland","doi":"10.1108/JPPEL-10-2018-0032","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/JPPEL-10-2018-0032","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000Purpose\u0000This paper aims to not only disentangle the recently altered law and policy on coastal management in New South Wales (NSW), Australia, but also raise opportunities for fresh ideas to develop when dealing with both existing and future coastal damage. The focus is on the role of local government which is not only closer to concerned citizens but also faces costal damage on its own doorstep.\u0000\u0000\u0000Design/methodology/approach\u0000The paper explores the topic from the beginnings of relevant statutory law to the current situation, supported by a case study. It is transdisciplinary in nature, encompassing land use and coastal legislation.\u0000\u0000\u0000Findings\u0000The narrative encourages further attention to the key issues at the local level. This is underpinned by the need for planners to move beyond zoning and other restrictive mechanisms to more strategic approaches. All levels of government must recognise that regulatory planning on its own is insufficient. This leads to the need for champions to consider opportunities beyond the ordinary.\u0000\u0000\u0000Originality/value\u0000While this paper will add to a growing literature on coastal damage and action at the local level, its emphasis on the benefits and limitations of the changing statutory system will assist not only policy makers but professional officers at the local forefront.\u0000","PeriodicalId":41184,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Property Planning and Environmental Law","volume":"11 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2019-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75866008","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-04-08DOI: 10.1108/JPPEL-09-2018-0027
A. Anisimov, A. Ryzhenkov
Purpose This paper aims to substantiate the existence of the form of ownership of natural resources (land) in the Russian law, unknown to European legal systems. Design/methodology/approach Dialectical method, historical method and system analysis method have been used. Findings The conducted research allows drawing a conclusion that non-delineated state form of ownership of land plots is a unique legal phenomenon caused by the specificity of the transition period of Russia from a totally state economy to a market economy. This inevitably leads to emergence of legal structures unknown to European systems of law and order. This issue has not only a theoretical but also practical nature. Originality/value Studies of this problem have never been conducted, neither in Russia nor in European legal science.
{"title":"Right of public ownership of land plots in the Russian Federation: discussion issues","authors":"A. Anisimov, A. Ryzhenkov","doi":"10.1108/JPPEL-09-2018-0027","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/JPPEL-09-2018-0027","url":null,"abstract":"Purpose \u0000 \u0000 \u0000 \u0000 \u0000This paper aims to substantiate the existence of the form of ownership of natural resources (land) in the Russian law, unknown to European legal systems. \u0000 \u0000 \u0000 \u0000 \u0000Design/methodology/approach \u0000 \u0000 \u0000 \u0000 \u0000Dialectical method, historical method and system analysis method have been used. \u0000 \u0000 \u0000 \u0000 \u0000Findings \u0000 \u0000 \u0000 \u0000 \u0000The conducted research allows drawing a conclusion that non-delineated state form of ownership of land plots is a unique legal phenomenon caused by the specificity of the transition period of Russia from a totally state economy to a market economy. This inevitably leads to emergence of legal structures unknown to European systems of law and order. This issue has not only a theoretical but also practical nature. \u0000 \u0000 \u0000 \u0000 \u0000Originality/value \u0000 \u0000 \u0000 \u0000 \u0000Studies of this problem have never been conducted, neither in Russia nor in European legal science.","PeriodicalId":41184,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Property Planning and Environmental Law","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2019-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74711564","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-04-08DOI: 10.1108/JPPEL-06-2018-0015
D. Olapade, B. Olapade, B. Aluko
Purpose This paper aims to explore the use of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) techniques as a legitimate means of ejection of recalcitrant tenant in property. This is with a view of providing information that will improve property investment and management. Design/methodology/approach The paper adopts a case study approach using five selected case studies where ADR approach was used to recover premises. Findings The experience from the case studies shows that the use of ADR in premises recovery is effective but has its challenges. In the five case studies, consent judgment, mediation and negotiation were used to recover premises in less than three months compared to an average of 18 months using litigation. Also, the cost in all the cases were lower where they exist at all than when litigation are used. The paper provides useful information to practitioners on the use of the effective alternative approach to recover premises from recalcitrant tenants. Originality/value The paper provides practical ways through which recovery of premises could be achieved through non-adversarial technique in developing property markets, which hitherto was not available in literature.
{"title":"Premises recovery through adoption of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) techniques","authors":"D. Olapade, B. Olapade, B. Aluko","doi":"10.1108/JPPEL-06-2018-0015","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/JPPEL-06-2018-0015","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000Purpose\u0000This paper aims to explore the use of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) techniques as a legitimate means of ejection of recalcitrant tenant in property. This is with a view of providing information that will improve property investment and management.\u0000\u0000\u0000Design/methodology/approach\u0000The paper adopts a case study approach using five selected case studies where ADR approach was used to recover premises.\u0000\u0000\u0000Findings\u0000The experience from the case studies shows that the use of ADR in premises recovery is effective but has its challenges. In the five case studies, consent judgment, mediation and negotiation were used to recover premises in less than three months compared to an average of 18 months using litigation. Also, the cost in all the cases were lower where they exist at all than when litigation are used. The paper provides useful information to practitioners on the use of the effective alternative approach to recover premises from recalcitrant tenants.\u0000\u0000\u0000Originality/value\u0000The paper provides practical ways through which recovery of premises could be achieved through non-adversarial technique in developing property markets, which hitherto was not available in literature.\u0000","PeriodicalId":41184,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Property Planning and Environmental Law","volume":"187 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2019-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83049577","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-04-08DOI: 10.1108/JPPEL-02-2018-0005
S. Alananga, Elitruder Richard Makupa, K. Moyo, U. Matotola, Emmanuel Francis Mrema
Purpose This paper aims to examine current land administration practices (LA) in Tanzania to pinpoint divergences and convergences from past experiences that necessitated the 1990s reforms. Design/methodology/approach Literature review was carried out to understand historical practices which were then matched with current regulatory framework and observable LA practices captured through in-depth individual and group interviews of LA professionals in the public and private sectors, as well as LA customers in Dodoma Region Tanzania. Findings The current practices and government’s responses through land law reforms is largely a replica of what happened in the pre- and post-independence eras until just before the 1990s reform and is still characterised by corruption, inefficiency in service delivery and poor coordination among LA actors. It introduces superficial land governance structure over customary land as it was during colonialism; induces a temporary hikes in title delivery without any sustainability prospects just as it was immediately after independence; and induces more uncertainties for local land holders/investors than it addresses as it was during the implementation of the 1982 agricultural policy. Furthermore, the current awareness education during rural land titling programmes is inadequate to address the perceived risk of land alienation and dispossession among the poor. Practical implications A uniform LA system and tenure type throughout Tanzania that cater for the need of the time rather than a fragmented system of LA, which fuels maladministration and inefficiency in LA, is dearly needed. Originality/value Convergence of current LA practices with some of the worst past experiences explains some failures in land policy reform in Tanzania and the developing world in general.
{"title":"Land administration practices in Tanzania: a replica of past mistakes","authors":"S. Alananga, Elitruder Richard Makupa, K. Moyo, U. Matotola, Emmanuel Francis Mrema","doi":"10.1108/JPPEL-02-2018-0005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/JPPEL-02-2018-0005","url":null,"abstract":"Purpose \u0000 \u0000 \u0000 \u0000 \u0000This paper aims to examine current land administration practices (LA) in Tanzania to pinpoint divergences and convergences from past experiences that necessitated the 1990s reforms. \u0000 \u0000 \u0000 \u0000 \u0000Design/methodology/approach \u0000 \u0000 \u0000 \u0000 \u0000Literature review was carried out to understand historical practices which were then matched with current regulatory framework and observable LA practices captured through in-depth individual and group interviews of LA professionals in the public and private sectors, as well as LA customers in Dodoma Region Tanzania. \u0000 \u0000 \u0000 \u0000 \u0000Findings \u0000 \u0000 \u0000 \u0000 \u0000The current practices and government’s responses through land law reforms is largely a replica of what happened in the pre- and post-independence eras until just before the 1990s reform and is still characterised by corruption, inefficiency in service delivery and poor coordination among LA actors. It introduces superficial land governance structure over customary land as it was during colonialism; induces a temporary hikes in title delivery without any sustainability prospects just as it was immediately after independence; and induces more uncertainties for local land holders/investors than it addresses as it was during the implementation of the 1982 agricultural policy. Furthermore, the current awareness education during rural land titling programmes is inadequate to address the perceived risk of land alienation and dispossession among the poor. \u0000 \u0000 \u0000 \u0000 \u0000Practical implications \u0000 \u0000 \u0000 \u0000 \u0000A uniform LA system and tenure type throughout Tanzania that cater for the need of the time rather than a fragmented system of LA, which fuels maladministration and inefficiency in LA, is dearly needed. \u0000 \u0000 \u0000 \u0000 \u0000Originality/value \u0000 \u0000 \u0000 \u0000 \u0000Convergence of current LA practices with some of the worst past experiences explains some failures in land policy reform in Tanzania and the developing world in general.","PeriodicalId":41184,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Property Planning and Environmental Law","volume":"28 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2019-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81440726","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-03-07DOI: 10.1108/JPPEL-08-2018-0025
Michel Vols, A. Belloir
Purpose In 2011, Dutch municipalities requested supplementary legal enforcement instruments to tackle rogue landlords and substandard housing. The national government implemented new legislation granting municipalities’ local authorities more legal instruments in 2015. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the application and effectiveness of these instruments. Design/methodology/approach Using both quantitative and qualitative (legal) empirical research methods, this study establishes the frequency these instruments are used and the manner they are applied in practice to determine their role in limiting abusive practices of rogue landlords. Findings By comparing legislation and policies with their enforcement, the authors pinpoint differences between the law in the books and the law in practice and argue that the legal instruments have a stronger effect on the informal power than on formal power of local authorities. Moreover, the paper shows that the shift of responsibility from the Public Prosecutions Office to local authorities has left the Public Prosecutions Office disinterested, feeling that it no longer has to deal with substandard housing violations at all, therefore leaving the repeat offenders free to continue their activities with minor consequences. Originality/value The paper presents original data on the ways governments address substandard housing and rogue landlords. This is the first study that analyses the fight against substandard housing in the Dutch context. Although centred on legislation and procedures in The Netherland, the paper’s findings are relevant in other jurisdictions facing similar issues.
{"title":"Tackling rogue landlords and substandard housing","authors":"Michel Vols, A. Belloir","doi":"10.1108/JPPEL-08-2018-0025","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/JPPEL-08-2018-0025","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000Purpose\u0000In 2011, Dutch municipalities requested supplementary legal enforcement instruments to tackle rogue landlords and substandard housing. The national government implemented new legislation granting municipalities’ local authorities more legal instruments in 2015. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the application and effectiveness of these instruments.\u0000\u0000\u0000Design/methodology/approach\u0000Using both quantitative and qualitative (legal) empirical research methods, this study establishes the frequency these instruments are used and the manner they are applied in practice to determine their role in limiting abusive practices of rogue landlords.\u0000\u0000\u0000Findings\u0000By comparing legislation and policies with their enforcement, the authors pinpoint differences between the law in the books and the law in practice and argue that the legal instruments have a stronger effect on the informal power than on formal power of local authorities. Moreover, the paper shows that the shift of responsibility from the Public Prosecutions Office to local authorities has left the Public Prosecutions Office disinterested, feeling that it no longer has to deal with substandard housing violations at all, therefore leaving the repeat offenders free to continue their activities with minor consequences.\u0000\u0000\u0000Originality/value\u0000The paper presents original data on the ways governments address substandard housing and rogue landlords. This is the first study that analyses the fight against substandard housing in the Dutch context. Although centred on legislation and procedures in The Netherland, the paper’s findings are relevant in other jurisdictions facing similar issues.\u0000","PeriodicalId":41184,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Property Planning and Environmental Law","volume":"74 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2019-03-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74153122","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-02-28DOI: 10.1108/JPPEL-06-2018-0017
Héctor Simón-Moreno, Padraic Kenna
Purpose The measures enacted so far at European level to address the global financial crisis are likely to have limited effects as they are still market efficiency oriented. Accordingly, this study aims to explore how the EU Charter on Fundamental Rights may be useful to achieve a more human right dimension in EU regulatory law. Design/methodology/approach The work departs from the current commodification of housing worldwide and the limited capacity of EU to tackle new housing challenges. The work takes the link already established by the CJEU between EU consumer law and the EU Charter on Fundamental Rights one step further and addresses the potential implications concerning residential mortgage lending. Findings The main finding is the potential influence that the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights may have on EU regulatory mortgage lending, as there are indicators of a bifurcation of mortgage law regimes at the EU level, separating home loans from other mortgages. Social implications The influence of the Charter of Fundamental Rights on EU regulatory law, mainly consumer law treated in a human rights dimension, could be a first step to treat housing as a social good and not as a commodity in the EU. This could lead to a completely new approach concerning the traditional rules governing residential mortgage loans. Originality/value The potential constitutionalisation of consumer law and the impact of the CJEU cases on national procedural rules have already been addressed by scholarship. The present work goes one step further as it addresses the potential implications of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights on EU regulatory law in terms of the potential bifurcation of EU rules on mortgage lending.
{"title":"Towards a new EU regulatory law on residential mortgage lending","authors":"Héctor Simón-Moreno, Padraic Kenna","doi":"10.1108/JPPEL-06-2018-0017","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/JPPEL-06-2018-0017","url":null,"abstract":"Purpose \u0000 \u0000 \u0000 \u0000 \u0000The measures enacted so far at European level to address the global financial crisis are likely to have limited effects as they are still market efficiency oriented. Accordingly, this study aims to explore how the EU Charter on Fundamental Rights may be useful to achieve a more human right dimension in EU regulatory law. \u0000 \u0000 \u0000 \u0000 \u0000Design/methodology/approach \u0000 \u0000 \u0000 \u0000 \u0000The work departs from the current commodification of housing worldwide and the limited capacity of EU to tackle new housing challenges. The work takes the link already established by the CJEU between EU consumer law and the EU Charter on Fundamental Rights one step further and addresses the potential implications concerning residential mortgage lending. \u0000 \u0000 \u0000 \u0000 \u0000Findings \u0000 \u0000 \u0000 \u0000 \u0000The main finding is the potential influence that the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights may have on EU regulatory mortgage lending, as there are indicators of a bifurcation of mortgage law regimes at the EU level, separating home loans from other mortgages. \u0000 \u0000 \u0000 \u0000 \u0000Social implications \u0000 \u0000 \u0000 \u0000 \u0000The influence of the Charter of Fundamental Rights on EU regulatory law, mainly consumer law treated in a human rights dimension, could be a first step to treat housing as a social good and not as a commodity in the EU. This could lead to a completely new approach concerning the traditional rules governing residential mortgage loans. \u0000 \u0000 \u0000 \u0000 \u0000Originality/value \u0000 \u0000 \u0000 \u0000 \u0000The potential constitutionalisation of consumer law and the impact of the CJEU cases on national procedural rules have already been addressed by scholarship. The present work goes one step further as it addresses the potential implications of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights on EU regulatory law in terms of the potential bifurcation of EU rules on mortgage lending.","PeriodicalId":41184,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Property Planning and Environmental Law","volume":"19 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2019-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79608221","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-10-08DOI: 10.1108/jppel-05-2018-0012
Gemma Caballé Fabra
{"title":"Buying a hotel room in Spain: the “condohotels”","authors":"Gemma Caballé Fabra","doi":"10.1108/jppel-05-2018-0012","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jppel-05-2018-0012","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":41184,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Property Planning and Environmental Law","volume":"34 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2018-10-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73303583","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：