Personal vs Proprietary Rights | Land Law

Subscribe to my personal channel for videos on how to study law effectively & efficiently: / @heygarethevans All land in England and Wales is vested in the Crown; it is therefore impossible for you or me to own the land itself. In 1066 William the Conqueror conquered England and one manifestation of this was that he became the owner of all the land. This brought about a conundrum: if he owned the physical land then what could the people own? The answer is provided in the doctrine of estates…
The doctrine of estates is the idea being that although we cannot own the physical land itself we can have a right to enjoy, use and control that land. In modern day, the only remaining legal estates in land are the “estate in fee simple absolute in possession” (or “freehold”) and the “term of years absolute” (or “leasehold”) (LPA 1925 s.1(1)(a)). Historically there were more than 2 legal estates.
If you have any questions drop me a message below 👍🏻
-------------------------------
Hey! If you’re new to the channel… my name is Gareth Evans
I am the owner of Digestible Notes, a website created to make learning fun and easy to understand. Our ultimate goal is to make education accessible to everyone and centralise the internet's vast sea of information.
I want to show you that anyone can achieve their learning goals and live their dream life.
Read from our website: digestiblenotes.com
-------------------------------
SEE MY VIDEO ON WHAT'S INSIDE AN ATOM ➡️
• What’s Inside An Atom?...
If you liked this blog post you may like my website post on 'Definitions and Rights in Land Law': digestiblenotes.com/law/land/...

[@digestiblelaw4647]

Subscribe to my personal channel for videos on how to study law effectively & efficiently: kzbin.info/door/wgN8QVt3yIqcoi04EVqEYA

[@Babychicken_22]

Ive been struggling soooo much to understand land law you dont even understand how helpful and simplified this was, thank you so much!!

[@digestiblelaw4647]

No problem! Really happy to hear I've helped 😁

[@sealife22]

You are a hero. Thank you Gareth for doing the digestible notes. For free

[@barneyrow]

Thank you!

[@tootz3137]

That was very helpful, thank you 🙏

[@digestiblelaw4647]

Thank you for watching and I'm happy to hear you found it useful!😁

[@lauraleeyisian2165]

More helpful than my professor!

[@noorrichards2668]

thank you😁

[@digestiblelaw4647]

No problem, glad I could help!! 😁👍🏻

[@sisyphussocrates8674]

could you please help with this question? " examine if english land law always respect the distinction between rights in rem and personam?

[@idildoeslaw1911]

What right would an individual have if they have a contract is sales and paid for the house, but have not completed completion?

[@DrJenYes]

I've been reading this repeatedly and couldn't grasp it! You explained it so well that in one video I understood this! Thank you!!

[@ghorofikr1990]

Great

[@digestiblelaw4647]

Thanks!

[@zilak192]

The video was very helpful thank you! I just wanted to check, when establishing whether it is proprietary or personal right, do the parties have to express and state which one it is?

[@digestiblelaw4647]

Glad it helped 😁And to answer your question: Nope, as long as you have fulfilled the requirements for creating that right then that is sufficient. For instance, inviting someone into your house is going to be a personal right without me saying that it is. Similarly, a proprietary right will automatically achieve that status if created by deed and registered!

[@zilak192]

@@digestiblelaw4647 okay so in a problem question for example, to know it’s a proprietary right there must be a deed and be registered. Thank you so much!!

[@aldeveron9498]

Very informative. Thank you. In the UK, when a finance company or mortagee repossesses land due to the mortagee's failure to keep up mortgage payments, does that finance company/mortgagee have the right to sell the freehold, even when the non-paying martgagor's name is still on the title deed?

[@mantarsingh6635]

yes they do have right to sell the freehold

[@aldeveron9498]

@@mantarsingh6635 Thank you for the reply. I had forgotten posting the question, but I was glad to hear the answer, as it's still of interest.

[@matrixdecoded4226]

Just a question for the sake of curiosity - in a technical sense has a person renting a motel room acquired an 'interest in land' and could they technically be referred to as a 'land owner', obviously for a very short duration?

[@digestiblelaw4647]

An interest in land can only exist if it falls within the definition of a legal or equitable right in rem under the LPA 1925. Renting a motel room is most likely not going to qualify, and you will simply have a licence (which isn't an interest in land).

[@matrixdecoded4226]

@@digestiblelaw4647 Okay. LPA 1925 would be a British statute I imagine. I was thinking more prosaically. If we set aside specific statutes and viewed the matter from a common law perspective would that change things? "An action in rem is a proceeding that takes no notice of the owner of the property but determines rights in the property that are conclusive against all the world." Could it not be argued that the renter of a motel room has specified rights in the property for the period of their 'tenancy'? In that respect is it not like a freehold title, to the extent both are tenancies?