You must have Credits on your Balance to download this sample
Finance & Accounting
Pages 10 (2510 words)
Land Law Essay Introduction In order to determine Noddy’s remedies against Toy Town Motors Ltd. and Bigears it is necessary to first define the type of interest that the arrangement with Bigear created. In other words, the main question is whether or not permission or the licence to use Redcap created a personal interest or a proprietary interest in the land.
These principles are found in the law of licences and the doctrine of proprietary estoppel. I. Remedies Prior to 1990 Prior to 1990 the law appeared to take two opposing positions relative to the extent to which licences created interests in land. The original position was stated in the early case of Thomas v Sorrell. In this case Lord Vaughan ruled that with respect to a licence, it neither passed nor modified “or transfers property in anything.”1 In other words, a licence merely functions to create a personal interest relative to the parties to the licence and as such does not operate to create an interest in land. The effect therefore is that the licence cannot be enforced against a third party. This principle of law prevailed and was indorsed by the House of Lords in King v David Allen and Sons, Billposting. In this case the House of Lords pointed held that a licence did not create a proprietary interest in land and as such could not function to be enforceable against a third party.2 Dixon explains however, that this unequivocal approach to licences was incapable of application across a board spectrum of circumstances. ...
Not exactly what you need?