Cliff claims the right to property by adverse possession. Issues Presented The issue in this case is who has the burden of proof regarding the adverse possession of this property and who will prevail in the event of litigation. Applicable Law The elements of adverse possession, as stated by Busziewicz v. Damion, 140 Ohio App. 3d 126, 130 (Ohio Ct. App., Cuyahoga County 2000), Jacks v. Brewington, 177 Ohio App.
The superseding decision in Kenyon v. Abel was determined through the use of common law. Common law is a body of unwritten laws adopted from England, used in courts to help determine the outcome of a litigation when no statute or precedent has previously been made. The main focus in this case was the law of gifts. “A valid gift consists of three elements: (1) a present intention to make an immediate gift; (2) actual of constructive delivery of the gift that divests the donor of dominion and control; (3) acceptance of the gift by the donee.” (Barnes, 620). According to the first element of gifts, a present intention to give the gift must be made, and it was not.
The CERCLA Windfall Lien: A Liability Trap for Unwary Purchasers of Contaminated Sites By Larry Schnapf The Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act of 2002 (the “2002 Brownfield Amendments”) added a Bona Fide Prospective Purchaser (“BFPP”) defense to the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (“CERCLA”) . The BFPP defense allows purchaser to knowingly take title to contaminated property provided they satisfy certain criteria but comes with an important hitch. Namely, EPA may perfect a “windfall lien” on property owned by a BFPP in certain circumstances to recover cleanup costs. This article will discuss the scope of this lien, the recent EPA guidance that discusses when the
The federal government can also control exchange in a situation when it has an effect on interstate progress of supplies and provisions and may strike down state proceedings which are obstacles to such movements (2012). Is The Confusion Statue Constitutional? Discuss Your Legal Reasoning Under the meaning of Article III, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution, the lawsuit stresses a “case of controversy.” Although states have the authority to set their own statues, some of them can cause distress and have to be evaluated by advanced courts. The state of Confusion is using the undemanding fact that the trucks have to drive through their state and are advancing from them economically. They are not requiring the B-type hitch to guard the roadways and are exclusively requiring the hitch to generate additional profits.
The Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949 was also significant as it altered the relationship between the House of Lords and the House of Commons. It ensured that the elected House of Commons would prevail over the unelected House of Lords by enabling acts to be passed with the
This case established three categories of entrance to land, and later a forth was added. They were contractual entrants, invitees, licensees and lastly trespassers. The emphasis was now placed on which legal category the entrant now fell and opposed to the more problamatic approach based upon the individual facts of each case. The first of these categories of entrants which will be examined is contractual entrants. This is where a person enters a premises on the basis that a contract exists between them and the occupier of the premises.
The question was that “who then in law is my neighbour? The answer was that anyone who is closely and directly affected by your act, to reasonably have them in contemplation as being affected when you are directed to a act. Duty of care This was brought to existence by Lord Bridge in Caparon Industries v Dickman (1990) in this case: The test in this case was that it must be clarified whether the loss was foreseeable i.e. if it could have been prevented as in case of Donoghue v Stevenson (1932) in the neighbour principle. If the loss was foreseeable, whether there was a sufficient relationship of proximity between the parties should be
This decision leads to the second case of Mabo v. Queensland .The High Court decision in Mabo v. State of Queensland (1992) 107 ALR 1 overthrew the belief that Australia was terra nullius when the English occupied it in 1788. This High Court decision recognized that the Indigenous Australians had native title to their land. Then, The Native Title Act 1993 was enacted to give effect to the principles of the Mabo decision. The act provides a regime for determining whether native title exists over particular areas of lands or waters, for validating certain past acts
The first element, Duty, can be looked at almost like the Golden Rule. Everyone has a general duty to carry out a reasonable care toward other people and their property. The second element comes into play if a person acts unreasonably. Their unreasonable action is then considered a breach of duty of care of element one (duty).For the law to determine whether a person's conduct is reasonable or not, the law has to ask: “Would a person of average intelligence and general regard for others have acted in the same way?” If the obvious answer is a no, then the person's behavior was unreasonable and thus, a
THE LAND REGISTRATION ACT 2002 – A CONVEYANCING REVOLUTION? The Land Registration Act 2002 received Royal Assent on 26th February 2002. The Law Commission considered that “the [Act] will bring about an unprecedented conveyancing revolution within a comparatively short time. It will also make other profound changes to the substantive law that governs registered land. These changes, taken together, are likely to be even more far-reaching than the great reforms of property law that were made by the 1925 property legislation”.