However, in the 1980s, these fees were removed, as were most rent regulations. Under the Landlords and Tenants Act 1985, the most important remaining protection is the obligation of landlords under section 11 to repair buildings, water and heating systems of real estate for short-term leases. The split, both historical and contemporary, has led to significant disputes over the meaning of a “lease.” In the main case, Street v. Mountford,[162] the House of Lords identified the de facto granting of exclusive ownership of property as a distinguishing feature between a lease and a licence. Ms Mountford paid a “royalty” for her house and had signed a form accepting that the Rent Act 1977 would not apply. However, she argued that she had a lease and the House of Lords agreed because, despite the form of her agreements, the content of the agreement was to give her exclusive ownership of her home. According to Lord Templeman in AG Securities v Vaughan, if people could get out of it, any legal protection would be “a dead letter, because in a state of housing shortage, a person looking for housing can accept anything to get housing.” [163] With respect to the question of whether a person enjoys legal protection, it was found irrelevant (contrary to the intuition of real estate lawyers) that the defendant himself had a property right. In Bruton v London & Quadrant Housing Trust,[164] Mr. Bruton`s housing association had only one licence for the property of the city council and was not carrying out any repairs. Although Mr. Bruton needed a lease to make a claim and that he could not be granted a lease for reasons of ownership by a trust that had only one licence, the House of Lords agreed, for the purposes of legal protection, that a lease be granted to him and that he could therefore seek redress.
The Property Rights Act (LPA) of 1925 has already been mentioned. Shortly before 1925, it was decided to revise the Land Law. The Property Act was one of many laws at the time. The aim of the collective legislation of 1925 was to simplify a number of aspects of transfer (trade with land): alienability (to the exclusion of others), investigation (on interests) and rights of third parties (or interests). The history of English land law dates back to Roman times and through the dark Middle Ages under the Saxon monarchs, where land, as with most of human history, was the dominant source of personal wealth. English land law changed from the Industrial Revolution and during the 19th century, when the political power of the landed aristocracy declined and modern legislation increasingly made land a social form of wealth subject to extensive social regulation, such as housing, national parks and agriculture. The range of easements is mainly limited by a quadruple test at Re Ellenborough Park. [175] The landowners around Ellenborough Park wanted to show that they had an easement on the community gardens to demand compensation for their requisition during the Second World War. Lord Evershed MR agreed because (1) they owned the dominant dwelling houses, (2) their rights to the “service” dwelling house (i.e.dem.
the park) benefited their land (3) they did not own the official dwelling house and, despite some previous authorities suggesting that the easements could not be for pure pleasure.[176] (4) they were part of a recognized category of easements. Most often, easements are rights of way. Many recent cases also concerned parking, including Moncrieff v Jamieson,[177] where the owner of land between the coast and a steep embankment had access only to his neighbour, and had become accustomed to parking there in 1973. The owner of the building stated that the parking lot had deprived him of the use of the land and therefore could not constitute an easement. But the House of Lords believed that in the nature of the parking lot (which was not permanent) to which the dominant owner had become accustomed, the right could be considered an easement. “Once a country`s land has become private property, landlords, like all other men, like to harvest where they have never sown, and even charge rent for their natural products. The wood of the forest, the grass of the field and all the natural fruits of the earth, which, when the land was common, cost the workers only the effort of collecting them, come to him, even to set them an additional price. He must then pay for the license to recover it; and must leave to the owner some of what his work collects or produces. This part, or, what amounts to the same thing, the price of this part, represents the rent of the land … Almost everyone will have to deal with certain elements of land law at least once in their life, whether you`re buying a house, knocking on someone`s door, or deciding to cut down a neighbor`s tree overhanging. While the typical content of “land law texts” in England or the United Kingdom concerns the content, creation and protection of interests in land ownership,[190] the practical and social importance of land extends to how it is used. Historically, land has been the most important source of social wealth.
.
