Academic literature on the topic 'Joint tenancy'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the lists of relevant articles, books, theses, conference reports, and other scholarly sources on the topic 'Joint tenancy.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Journal articles on the topic "Joint tenancy"
1
Tee, Louise. "Ossa Upon Pelion? Severance and the Insolvency Legislation." Cambridge Law Journal 54, no. 1 (1995): 52–59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0008197300083148.
Full textAbstract:
It has long been established that the (involuntary) alienation which occurs when a bankrupt's estate vests in his trustee severs any beneficial joint tenancy, with the effect that the trustee holds the co-owned property as a beneficial tenant in common.1 The timing of such severance is of vital interest to unsecured creditors and the other coowners alike. If a beneficial joint tenant dies before severance is deemed to have taken place, his unsecured creditors are unable to claim against any share of the property, for it is an essential characteristic of joint tenancy that each joint tenant is entitled to the whole interest or estate, but only for his lifetime: upon the death of a joint tenant, his potential “share” accrues to those remaining in accordance with the right of survivorship. If, however, a co-owner dies after his interest has been severed, his share of the property is available for distribution among his creditors. Where a jointly-owned home is the debtor's only substantial asset, the distinction is crucial.
2
Cloherty, Adam, and David Fox. "PROVING A BENEFICIAL JOINT TENANCY." Cambridge Law Journal 65, no. 3 (2006): 496–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0008197306297204.
Full text
3
Luther, Peter. "Williams v Hensman and the uses of history." Legal Studies 15, no. 2 (1995): 219–35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-121x.1995.tb00060.x.
Full textAbstract:
When the topic of severance of a beneficial joint tenancy is discussed, most judges and academics start with the case of Williams v Hensman. The judgment of Sir William Page Wood V-C is the ‘locus classicus’, the ‘starting point for any discussion of the modem law’. One paragraph of Page Wood's judgment is quoted in case after case:‘A joint tenancy may be severed in three ways: in the first place, an act of one of the persons interested operating on his own share may create a severance as to that share. The right of each joint tenant is a right by survivorship only in the event of no severance having taken place of the share which is claimed under the jus accrescendi. Each one is at liberty to dispose of his own interest in such a manner as to sever it from the joint fund - losing, of course, at the same time, his own right of survivorship.
4
Gorton, Timothy Brendan. "Until Fraud Do Us Part: Reconciling Joint Tenancy and the Torrens Land System in Cassegrain v Gerard Cassegrain & Co Pty Ltd." QUT Law Review 16, no. 2 (2016): 93. http://dx.doi.org/10.5204/qutlr.v16i2.655.
Full textAbstract:
<p> </p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;"><em>In early 2015, the High Court of Australia decided </em>Cassegrain v Gerard Cassegrain &amp; Co Pty Ltd<em>, relating to the fraudulent registration of a joint tenancy under Torrens legislation. The Court unanimously criticised the methods employed by lower courts in interpreting New South Wales’ Torrens legislation (and its ‘protection of purchasers’ provision) and in determining the existence and scope of an agency relationship. However, the Court split on the question of whether an innocent joint tenant had their interest rendered defeasible by reason of their co-joint tenant’s fraud. This article reviews and analyses in particular the Court’s evaluation and treatment of the legal principles of joint tenancy.</em></span></span></p><p> </p><p><em>.</em></p>
5
Gravells, Nigel P. "SEVERANCE OF A JOINT TENANCY: A LAND LAW “WHODUNNIT?”." Cambridge Law Journal 71, no. 1 (2012): 42–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s000819731200013x.
Full text
6
Rodgers, Chris. "Notices to Quit, Protective legislation and the Joint Tenancy Doctrine." Modern Law Review 48, no. 4 (1985): 460–65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.1985.tb00854.x.
Full text
7
Kharytonova, O. "The right of marital joint tenancy of a trademark: concerns." Юридичний вісник, no. 6 (2023): 69–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.32782/yuv.v6.2023.8.
Full text
8
Mikhailova, I. A. "Fathers and Sons through the Lens of Ownership of Residential Premises." Lex Russica 74, no. 10 (2021): 26–35. http://dx.doi.org/10.17803/1729-5920.2021.179.10.026-035.
Full textAbstract:
The paper examines the sociolegal and economic significance of legislative measures taken to support families with children and granting the possibility of using maternal (family) fund for the acquisition, construction or reconstruction of residential premises. It analyzes numerous issues related to the acquisition, registration, exercise and protection of joint tenancy (the right to common share ownership of residential premises) acquired in this way, including: the procedure for determining the share in the ownership of residential premises acquired in this manner. The paper also examines factors on which the size of the share of each of the family members depends and parties to the agreements concluded regarding such a distribution. Much attention is also paid to the issues of whether it is mandatory, when determining the size of a share in the ownership of a dwelling, to take into account the opinion of a child who has reached the age of 10, and the competition between the rights and interests of parents and children in respect of dwellings belonging to them on the basis of a joint tenancy (common share property). On the basis of the analysis of the Soviet and Russian civil and housing legislation in order to prevent the violation of the rights of parents to such property by adult children living with them, the author makes a proposal to legally restrict the administrative powers belonging to children.The author summarizes that the presence of an indissoluble consanguinity in the form of the origin of children from parents and the efforts of parents to take care of the child’s health, to meet the child’s needs, to provide conditions for the child’s full development and education necessitate a special legal consolidation of the rights to living premises belonging to children and parents on the ground of the right to joint tenancy (common shared ownership). The inclusion into Art. 246 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation of provisions restricting the administrative powers of adult children will constitute another step towards the humanization of Russian civil legislation.
9
Biscopink, Eric M. "Never Stop Improving?" Texas A&M Journal of Property Law 1, no. 2 (2012): 149–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.37419/jpl.v1.i2.1.
Full textAbstract:
This Comment argues that a co-tenant who improves a concurrent estate without the consent of the other co-tenant should be liable for the increased tax liability caused by the improvement. Part II surveys the current law surrounding concurrent estates, providing background to the common law rules on the various types of co-tenants. This will provide context for the subsequent argument about how property taxes could have a drastic effect on the current face of concurrent estates. The Author will overview property taxes as they relate to local property, delving into the property tax rates, in particular, and how they relate to concurrent estates. In Part III, the Author will discuss the principles of a sound state tax policy, and weigh those principles to determine what are the most important factors in creating a tax. This will illuminate the need for a concrete rule and what that rule should be. Part IV of this Comment will set up the central problem: whether a co-tenant can improve the concurrent estate to the extent that the property tax liability is too great for the other co-tenant, essentially improving the co-tenant out of the property. The problem poses related issues with the well-established case law. If the purpose of not allowing a co-tenant the right to contribution for improvements is to prevent a wealthier co-tenant from ousting his or her other co-tenants, then why can he or she currently do it through a loophole of creating tax liability? However, if the non-improving co-tenant is not liable for the property tax, is the purpose behind the required contribution for necessary costs void? Part V will offer a solution to the tax liability from improvements to concurrent property. The Author will propose to close the gap in the law consistent with the rule for improvements by a co-tenant. The improving co-tenant will be liable for the rise in tax liability for any improvement done without the consent of the non-improver. Ultimately, a co-tenant should not be in danger of being ousted from a concurrent estate by an increase in tax liability due to non-consented improvements to the property owned in joint tenancy. Therefore, the Author proposes the gap in the current law be addressed with the requisite legislation.
10
Majid, Nomaan. "The joint system of share tenancy and self‐cultivation: Evidence from Sind, Pakistan." Journal of Peasant Studies 25, no. 3 (1998): 63–85. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03066159808438675.
Full textDissertations / Theses on the topic "Joint tenancy"
1
Gao, Wei, and 高伟. "An empirical study of co-ownership building management : a collective action perspective." Thesis, The University of Hong Kong (Pokfulam, Hong Kong), 2013. http://hdl.handle.net/10722/193502.
Full textAbstract:
Residential buildings under co-ownership are properties governed by mixed systems of communal and individual property rights. Their management demands a high level of organized cooperation and coordination among them. However, owners’ collective actions are never straightforward owing to their temptation to free ride. Without owners’ collective actions, management works can be delayed or even cancelled, which results in deteriorating building conditions. With the increasing number of people living in co-owned residential buildings, whether they can overcome collective action problems and effectively manage their properties becomes important to long-term management of building stocks. Therefore, this study aims to assess management performance of co-owned residential buildings and to explore the variations of the management performance from a collective action perspective.
A rigorous tool for assessing management performance of co-owned residential buildings was developed in this study. The tool consisted of a hierarchy of key performance indicators which evaluate the capability of an owners’ group to make collective decisions, enforce management rules, and monitor its buildings’ condition. The application of the tool on a co-owned residential building generates a performance profile representing its management performance. The proposed tool was used to assess the management performance of 74 sampled buildings in Hong Kong. The survey data was collected from the sampled buildings through desk studies, face-to-face interviews, questionnaires by post, and on- site inspections.
Multiple regression analyses were applied to investigate the effects of the exogenous factors on building management performance. The empirical results showed that large-size owners groups were more likely to perform well in managing their properties. Homogeneous owners groups were associated with a greater likelihood to achieve high management performance. More importantly, the empirical results revealed that the owners group of a co-owned residential building were more likely obtain high performance in managing the communal properties under the following circumstances: 1) well-defined boundaries of the communal properties; 2) a fair distribution of their rights and responsibilities to management; 3) a presence of effective mechanism to regulate their use of the communal properties; and 4) a way to rapidly resolve their disputes over management.
The major contribution of this study is to the field of building management. The proposed tool in this study can used by owners, property managers, investors, and policy-makers to access to management information on co-owned residential buildings, which helps them make better decisions on buildings. In addition, findings of this study provided an explanation of the variations in building management performance, which has great implications for government policies that aim to encourage owners to cooperate in management of their properties.<br>published_or_final_version<br>Real Estate and Construction<br>Doctoral<br>Doctor of Philosophy
2
Dyer, Janice Frew Bailey L. Conner. "Heir property legal and cultural dimensions of collective landownership in Alabama's Black Belt /." Auburn, Ala., 2007. http://repo.lib.auburn.edu/2006%20Fall/Theses/DYER_JANICE_41.pdf.
Full text
3
AlHaddad, Saif Ahmad. "A critical evaluation of certain aspects of the law concerning ownership of jointly owned property schemes in Dubai." Thesis, University of Aberdeen, 2010. http://digitool.abdn.ac.uk:80/webclient/DeliveryManager?pid=165130.
Full textAbstract:
This research is an attempt to determine the reasons for the problems currently being experienced in Dubai in the implementation of the Dubai Law Concerning Ownership of Jointly Owned Properties. Although the Dubai Law has applied to Dubai for almost three years and is a very young law, most of the shortcomings can be attributed to the delay in the promulgation of the envisaged implementing regulations including the Master Community Declaration, the Building Management Statement and the Association Constitution. This has motivated the writing of this thesis which seeks to examine and analyse the entire system of jointly owned property ownership in the Emirate of Dubai. The emphasis is on the establishment of the jointly owned property schemes, the physical division of jointly owned property schemes into units and common areas, the allocation of share units in jointly owned property schemes, the rights and obligations of unit owners with regard to their units and the common areas, the enforcement of financial and social obligations, settlement of disputes and finally the management of jointly owned property schemes. An examination of the differences between the Dubai Law and several other systems has been made to find out why one works better than the other. Does the problem lie in the nature of the governing legislation, the procedures of the Competent Authority namely, the Land Department and the Real Estate Regulatory Agency for applying and obtaining registration of a jointly owned property plan, the laws and practices relating to the development, construction, financing and conveyancing of jointly owned property or a combination of all these factors? The insights gained by the examination of the jointly owned property industry, reveal whether the problems and issues currently faced on the ground have been the result of the law or have been caused by other factors beyond the scope of solutions prescribed by the law. The present legislation in force for jointly owned property in Dubai has provided an adequate legal structure for all the matters discussed above. From my evaluation of the various aspects of the Dubai Law Concerning Ownership of Jointly Owned Properties, it appears that there is room for improvement in virtually every aspect examined in order to keep up with the rapid growth of jointly owned property schemes in Dubai and all over the United Arab Emirates. In addition, the housing delivery system in Dubai must change. Officials involved in the approval and registration of jointly owned property schemes have to be properly trained in order to ensure that they have the required knowledge of the law and care should be taken to recruit more qualified personnel in the related Offices.
4
van, der Merwe Zerlinda. "Constitutionality of the rules governing sectional title schemes." Thesis, Stellenbosch : University of Stellenbosch, 2010. http://hdl.handle.net/10019.1/5342.
Full textAbstract:
Thesis (LLM (Public Law))--University of Stellenbosch, 2010.<br>Bibliography<br>ENGLISH ABSTRACT: Various types of rules govern many areas of life in a sectional title scheme. The
Sectional Titles Act 95 of 1986 prescribes model management and conduct rules in
its regulations. Other non-prescribed rules are adopted by either the developers
initially or later by the trustees of the body corporate. These rules provide for the
control, management, administration, use and enjoyment of the sections and the
common property in the scheme. Sectional owners and other occupiers have the
entitlements of use and enjoyment of their individual sections and their share in the
common property of the sectional title scheme, in proportion to their participation
quota. These entitlements are restricted by the rules in operation within the scheme.
Although these rules limit the entitlements of sectional owners and other occupiers in
the interest of the sectional title community, they may not be unreasonable in their
application and effect. In some instances, the application of the rules might exceed
the bounds of reasonableness and result in unfair discrimination, arbitrary
deprivation, unfair administrative action or restrictions on access to courts for dispute
resolution. If certain rules are unreasonable in their application, based on one or
more of the abovementioned grounds, the court must interpret the potentially
impermissible rules and if the court cannot avoid a declaration of invalidity by
implementing a constitutional remedy such as reading-up, reading-down, reading-in
or severance, these impermissible rules will need to be substituted, amended or
repealed and replaced because they are potentially unconstitutional and invalid.
After a statutory and constitutional enquiry into the nature, scope, application,
operation and effect of the rules governing sectional title schemes, it can be
concluded that the various types of rules governing sectional title schemes restrict
and limit sectional owners’ and occupiers’ entitlements of use and enjoyment of their
individual sections and share in the common property. However, after being tested
against section 25 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa 1996 and other
non-property rights entrenched in the Bill of Rights, to determine if the rules are
reasonable in their application and constitutionally permissible, it can be seen that
the application of the rules do not necessarily amount to arbitrary deprivations of property and that they can be justified in terms of the Constitution because there is
sufficient reasons for the particular regulations and they are procedurally fair.
The various different types of rules governing sectional title schemes serve as
reasonable regulations in as far as they contribute to a harmonious relationship
between the trustees of the body corporate and the sectional owners and occupiers
as members of the body corporate as well as between the members of the body
corporate inter se. The rules serve an important function in this regard. Therefore,
they are considered reasonable and constitutionally valid in as far as they do not
enforce excessive regulation and as long as they are equally applicable and do not
unfairly differentiate in their application.<br>AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Verskeie tipes reëls reguleer alledaagse aangeleenthede in ‘n deeltitelskema. Die
Wet op Deeltitels 95 van 1986 maak voorsiening vir voorgeskrewe bestuurs- en
gedragsreëls in die regulasies. Die ontwikkelaars of die trustees van die regspersoon
kan aanvanklik met die stigting van die skema of op ‘n latere stadium addisionele
reëls byvoeg wat nie alreeds deur die Wet voorgeskryf is nie. Die reëls maak
voorsiening vir die beheer, bestuur, administrasie, gebruik en genot van die eenheid
en die gemeenskaplike eiendom in die skema. Die deeleienaars van deeltitelskemas
en ander okkupeerders van die skema is geregtig om hulle individuele eenhede
sowel as die gemeenskaplike eiendom, in ooreenstemming met hulle
deelnemingskwota, te gebruik en geniet; en dit vorm deel van hul
inhoudsbevoegdhede.
Hierdie inhoudsbevoegdhede word beperk deur die skema se reëls. Afgesien
daarvan dat die reëls die deeleienaar en ander okkupeerders se
inhoudsbevoegdhede beperk in die belang van die deeltitelgemeenskap, mag die
reëls nie onredelik wees in die toepassing daarvan nie. In sommige gevalle kan die
toepassing van die reëls die perke van redelikheid oorskry en neerkom op
ongeregverdigde diskriminasie, arbitrêre ontneming, ongeregverdigde
administratiewe handeling of ‘n beperking plaas op toegang tot die howe met die oog
op dispuutoplossing. Indien daar bevind word dat sekere reëls onredelik is in die
toepassing daarvan op grond van een of meer van die voorafgemelde gronde, moet
die hof artikel 39 van die Grondwet volg en die reël interpreteer om ‘n deklarasie van
ongeldigheid te vermy. As die hof dit nie kan vermy deur middel van
konstitutusionele remedies soos “op-lesing”, “af-lesing”, “afskeiding” of “in-lesing”
nie, sal die reëls gewysig of geskrap en vervang moet word, anders sal die reël
ongrondwetlik wees en ongeldig verklaar word.
Na afloop van ‘n statutêre en konstitusionele ondersoek ten opsigte van die aard,
omvang, toepassing, werking en effek van die reëls wat deeltitelskemas reguleer
word daar bevind dat die verskeie tipes reëls wat ‘n deeltitelskema reguleer ‘n
beperking plaas op die inhousdbevoegdhede van deeltiteleienaars en ander okkupeerders wat betref die reg om die eenheid sowel as die gemeenskaplike
eiendom te gebruik en geniet. Ten einde te bepaal of die reëls redelik in die
toepassing daarvan sowel as grondwetlik toelaatbaar is, word dit getoets in terme
van artikel 25 van die Grondwet van die Republiek van Suid-Afrika 1996 en ander
regte in die Handves van Regte. Daar word bevind dat die toepassing van die reëls
nie noodwendig ‘n arbitrêre ontneming van eiendom is nie en dat dit geregverdig kan
word in terme van die Grondwet omdat daar voldoende redes vir die spesifieke
regulasies is en omdat dat hulle prosedureel billik is.
Die verskeie tipes reëls wat ‘n deeltitelskema reguleer dien as redelike regulasies
sover dit bydra tot ‘n harmonieuse verhouding tussen die trustees van die
regspersoon, die deeltiteleienaars en die okkupeerders as lede van die regspersoon
sowel as tussen die lede van die regspersoon inter se. Die reëls het ‘n belangrike
funksie in hierdie verband. Die reëls word geag redelik en grondwetlik geldig te wees
sover dit nie buitensporige regulasies afdwing nie, gelyk toegepas word en daar nie
ongeregverdig gedifferensieer word in die toepassing daarvan nie.
5
Booysen, Juann. "A critical analysis of the financial and social obligations imposed on sectional owners in sectional title schemes, as well as their enforcement." Thesis, Stellenbosch : Stellenbosch University, 2014. http://hdl.handle.net/10019.1/86255.
Full textAbstract:
Thesis (LLD)--Stellenbosch University, 2012<br>ENGLISH ABSTRACT: Over the years sectional ownership satisfied the psychological need of many South
Africans to acquire home-ownership and it is currently estimated that there are more
than 780 000 sectional title units throughout South Africa. The concept of sectional
ownership consists of three elements, namely individual ownership of a section
(residential or commercial); joint ownership of the common parts of the sectional title
scheme and membership of the body corporate which governs the sectional title
community. Sectional ownership is therefore a unique statutory institution with its
own characteristics.
An imperative of every sectional title scheme is to strive for financial stability,
happiness and harmony in an intensified, diverse community where the objects of
ownership, the individual units, are physically interdependent. The Sectional Titles
Act 95 of 1986, as amended, therefore imposes numerous financial and social
obligations on sectional owners. These obligations require each owner to give up a
certain degree of freedom that he might otherwise enjoy in separate, privately owned
property. Ultimately the success of a sectional title scheme will depend upon the
necessary co-operation and support of its members for compliance with these
obligations. Since non-compliance can destroy the financial stability and social
harmony in a sectional title scheme, effective procedures for the enforcement of
these financial and social obligations are essential. Accordingly, effective sanctions
are a sine qua non for a financially viable and socially successful sectional title
scheme.
This thesis provides a critical analysis of the various financial and social obligations
that are imposed on sectional owners, as well as the measures available for their
enforcement. It will become evident that the sanctions in the South African sectional
title legislation for non-compliance with these obligations are conspicuously few and
far between. It is generally accepted that the Sectional Titles Act 95 of 1986 does
not have sharp enough „teeth‟ to deal effectively with the non-compliance of these
obligations. Consequently, the thesis will also focus on sanctions that are used in
foreign jurisdictions to enforce sectional owners‟ financial and social obligations, with the aim to identify sanctions that may be adopted in the South African context to
render the enforcement of these obligations more efficient and effective. In
conclusion it will be recommended that the only manner in which financial stability
and social harmony can be restored in a troubled sectional title scheme is to
introduce legislation which allows the body corporate as a last resort to exclude a
persistent offender who makes it impossible for the other sectional owners to share
the sectional owners‟ community with him or her temporarily from this community.<br>AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Met die verloop van tyd sedert die eerste deeltitelwetgewing in 1971 in Suid Afrika
ingevoer is, het deeleiendom die droom van menige Suid-Afrikaners verwesenlik om
eiendomsreg van „n eie woning te verkry. Huidige statistieke dui daarop dat daar
meer as 780 000 deeltiteleenhede in Suid Afrika is. Drie elemente word in die begrip
„deeleiendom‟ saamgevat, naamlik individuele eiendomsreg van „n deel (residensiëel
of kommersiëel), mede-eindomsreg van die gemeenskaplike gedeeltes van „n skema
en lidmaatskap van „n regspersoon. Deeleiendom is dus „n unieke statutêre
instelling met sy eie ongewone karaktertrekke.
Die belangrikste doelwit van elke deeltitelskema is om finansiële stabiliteit, geluk en
harmonie in „n geϊntensifeerde, diverse gemeenskap waar individuele
eiendomseenhede, fisies interafhanklik is, te bewerkstellig. Die Wet op Deeltitels 95
van 1986, soos gewysig, onderwerp deeleienaars daarom aan verskeie finansiële en
sosiale verpligtinge wat meebring dat elke deeleienaar „n sekere mate van vryheid
moet prys gee wat hy andersins sou geniet het as hy eienaar was van „n huis op „n
private erf. Die uiteindelike sukses van „n deeltitelskema is grotendeels afhanklik
van die samewerking en ondersteuning van sy lede wat betref die nakoming van
hierdie verpligtinge. Omdat nie-nakoming die finansiële stabiliteit en sosiale
harmonie kan versteur word doeltreffende maatreëls vereis vir die afdwinging van
hierdie finansiële en sosiale verpligtinge. „n Deeltitelskema kan slegs met sukses
bestuur word indien op doeltreffende sanksies gesteun kan word.
Hierdie tesis fokus op „n kritiese analise van die verskeie finansiële en sosiale
verpligtinge waaraan deeleienaars onderhewig is, en die maatreëls wat aangewend
kan word om hierdie verpligtinge af te dwing. Daar sal aangetoon word dat die
sanksies in die Suid-Afrikaanse deeltitelwetgewing vir die nie-nakoming van hierdie
verpligtinge gans te min, en boonop uiters ondoeltreffend is. Daarom word
algemeen aanvaar dat die „tande‟ van die Wet op Deeltitels 95 van 1986 nie skerp
genoeg is om die nie-nakoming van hierdie verpligtinge doeltreffend te straf nie.
Gevolglik sal die tesis ook fokus op sanksies wat in buitelandse regstelsels
aangewend word om die finansiële en sosiale verpligtinge van deeleienaars af te dwing. Die oogmerk hiermee is om buitelandse sanksies te identifiseer wat met vrug
in die Suid-Afrikaanse konteks aangewend kan word ten einde die nie-nakoming van
hierdie verpligtinge doeltreffend hok te slaan. Ter afsluiting sal voorgestel word dat
finansiële stabiliteit en sosiale harmonie in „n erg ontwrigte deeltitelskema slegs
herstel kan word indien wetgewing aangeneem word wat die regspersoon toelaat om
„n deeleienaar wat ondanks waarskuwings dit vir mede-deeleienaars onmoontlik
maak om saam met hom of haar in dieselfde deeleiendomsgemeenskap te leef
tydelik van die skema te verwyder.
6
Lai, Yuen-kwan. "A comparative study of tenant mix between shopping centres in residential buildings and office buildings /." View the Table of Contents & Abstract, 2008. http://sunzi.lib.hku.hk/hkuto/record/B40988442.
Full text
7
Lai, Yuen-kwan, and 黎婉筠. "A comparative study of tenant mix between shopping centres in residential buildings and office buildings." Thesis, The University of Hong Kong (Pokfulam, Hong Kong), 2008. http://hub.hku.hk/bib/B45009363.
Full text
8
Tang, Wing-chung Henry, and 鄧榮聰. "The influence of tenant mix planning on the patronage of neighborhood shopping centres in Hong Kong." Thesis, The University of Hong Kong (Pokfulam, Hong Kong), 2009. http://hub.hku.hk/bib/B44402053.
Full text
9
Habibovic, Sejla, and Per Real Svensson. "Friköp av bostadsrättsföreningar och överföring av fastighetstillbehör : Vad avgör om anläggningslagen 12 a § tillämpas?" Thesis, Högskolan Väst, Avdelningen för data-, elektro- och lantmäteriteknik, 2017. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:hv:diva-11453.
Full textAbstract:
Samverkan fastigheter emellan förekommer i flera olika former. En gemensamhetsanläggning utgör en sådan samverkansform, vilken inrättas för att tillgodose ändamål av stadigvarande betydelse för flera fastigheter. Ändamålen som en gemensamhetsanläggning inrättas för är vitt skilda och består ofta av anläggningar som utgör tillbehör till en fastighet, däribland fastighetstillbehör. Med en gemensamhetsanläggning följer rätten till utrymme för att de deltagande fastigheterna ska kunna förvalta anläggningen på ett ändamålsenligt sätt. Dock övergår inte äganderätten till de deltagande fastigheterna automatiskt vid inrättandet av en gemensamhetsanläggning. Innan år 2002 sågs fastighet och dess tillbehör som en äganderättslig enhet, vilka enbart kunde åtskiljas genom att tillbehöret fysiskt flyttades från fastigheten. Bestämmelser som möjliggjorde överföring av fastighetstillbehör och äganderätt till anläggningssamfälligheten infördes i fastighetsbildningslagen (FBL) och anläggningslagen (AL). Även bestämmelse om möjlighet till frigörande av fastighetstillbehör infördes samtidigt i ledningsrättslagen (LL). I propositionen Överföring av fastighetstillbehör 2000/01:138 motiverades införandet av lagändringarna med att en rad oklarheter skulle kunna undvikas rörande fastighetstillbehöret. Dessa utgjordes av oklarhet kring underhållsansvar, ansvar att teckna försäkring, upplåtelse av nyttjanderätt, rätt att bygga om och bygga ut, samt utnyttjande av pantsättningsmöjligheten. Att äga sin egen fastighet har alltid varit viktigt, inte enbart för den enskilde individen, utan även för samhällets utveckling. Ägandet skapar incitament att lägga ner tid, energi och pengar i sin fastighet, vilket i sin tur genererar ett högre fastighetsvärde. Trots detta är bostadsrätten en vanlig bostadsform i Sverige. Möjlighet finns dock att genom likvidation av bostadsrättsföreningen och avstyckning av fastigheten bilda nya enskilda fastigheter. För de utrymmen och anläggningar som tidigare varit gemensamma kvarstår dock behovet av att även i fortsättning kunna utnyttjas gemensamt. I praktiken är det endast fastighetsgränserna och ägandeformen som ändrats, inte de fysiska förutsättningarna. Genom inrättande av en gemensamhetsanläggning tillgodoses detta behov. För att även kunna överföra äganderätten till de deltagande fastigheterna finns möjligheten att tillämpa AL 12 a §. Denna studie undersöker vad som varit avgörande för om AL 12 a § tillämpats och vilka fastighetstillbehör som vanligen överförts. För gemensamhetsanläggningar är ansvar ett centralt begrepp. Studien undersöker hur ansvaret kring försäkringsfrågan påverkas om överföring med stöd av AL 12 a § sker eller inte. För att kunna reda ut ansvarsfrågan var det viktigt att försöka förstå vad som skiljer rätten till utrymme från äganderätten. Resultatet visar att överföring av fastighetstillbehör med stöd av AL 12 a § förekommit i 17 av de 45 insamlade förrättningsakterna. De fastighetstillbehör som vanligen överförts var framförallt VA-ledningar, men också dagvattenledningar, utomhusbelysning, medieanläggningar i form av kabel-tv, bredband, fiber och centralantenn, samt körytor såsom väg och utfart. Avgörande för om AL 12 a § tillämpas är förrättningslantmätarens inställning till, och kunskap om bestämmelsen. Vad gäller ansvar kring försäkringsfrågan anses anläggningssamfällighetens förvaltningsform av större betydelse än om överföring kommit till stånd eller inte. Rätten till utrymme skiljer sig obetydligt från äganderätten i detta sammanhang, eftersom försäkringsvillkoren utgår från ansvaret för fastighetstillbehöret och inte själva äganderätten. Överföringen av fastighetstillbehöret saknar därför praktisk betydelse. Föreningsförvaltning anses i sammanhanget lämpligare än delägarförvaltning. Valet av förvaltningsform är viktigare ju dyrare fastighetstillbehöret är och ju större nytta det utgör för de i gemensamhetsanläggningen deltagande fastigheterna.<br>The interaction of properties exist in several different forms. A joint facility forms such a form of cooperation, which is set up to accommodate purposes of constant importance for several properties. The purposes for which a joint facility is set up are widely different and often consist of facilities that make up a property, including property fixtures. With a joint facility follows the right to space for the participating properties to manage the facility appropriately. However, ownership of the participating properties will not automatically change when setting up a joint facility. Before 2002, property and its fixtures were seen as an ownership unit, which could only be separated by the physical removal of the fixture from the property. Regulations that allowed the transfer of property fixtures and property rights to the facility were introduced in the Real Property Formation Act (FBL) and the Joint Facilities Act (AL). Even regulation on the possibility of release of property fixtures was introduced simultaneously in the Utility Easements Act (LL). In the government bill Transfer of property fixtures 2000/01: 138, the introduction of the legislative changes was motivated by the fact that a number of uncertainties could be avoided regarding the property fixtures. These consisted of uncertainties about maintenance responsibility, liability to subscribe for insurance, assignment of use rights, the right to rebuild and expand, as well as the use of the mortgaging. Owning your own property has always been important not only for the individual but also for the development of society. The ownership creates incentives to spend time, energy and money on your property, which in turn generates a higher property value. Nevertheless, tenant-ownership is a common housing form in Sweden. However, it is possible to create new individual properties through liquidation of the tenant-ownership and the subdivision of the property. However, for those spaces and facilities that has previously been common, the need remains for common use. In practice, only the property boundaries and ownership have changed, not the physical conditions. Establishment of a joint facility meets this need. In order to also transfer ownership of the participating properties there is the possibility of applying AL 12 a §. This study investigates what has been crucial for whether AL 12 a § has been applied and which property fixtures are usually transferred. Responsibility for joint facilities is a key concept. The study examines how responsibility for the insurance issue is affected if transfer under AL 12 a § happens or not. In order to answer the question of liability, it was important to try to understand what separates the right to space from ownership. The result shows that transfer of property fixtures under AL 12 a § occurred in 17 of the 45 gathered acts of execution. The property fixtures that were usually transferred were mainly VA-pipelines but also watercourses, outdoor lighting, media installations in the form of cable TV, broadband, fiber and central antenna, as well as driving areas such as road and exit. The decisive factor in applying AL 12 a § is the attitude of the cadastral surveyor, and knowledge of the regulation. Regarding the liability of the insurance issue, the joint property unit of the facility is considered to be of greater significance than if the transfer has taken place or not. The right to space differs slightly from ownership in this context, as the insurance terms are based on the responsibility for property fixtures and not the property rights themselves. The transfer of the property fixtures therefore lacks practical significance. Associations management is considered more appropriate in this context than part-owner management. The choice of management form is more important, the more expensive the property fixtures are and the more useful it is for the properties participating in the joint venture.
Books on the topic "Joint tenancy"
1
Law Reform Commission of Western Australia. Report on joint tenancy and tenancy in common. Law Reform Commission of Western Australia, 1994.
Find full text
2
Law Reform Commission of Western Australia. Report on joint tenancy and tenancy in common. The Commission, 1994.
Find full text
3
Rasban, Sadali. Joint tenancy: The shariah perspectives. HTHT Advisory Services, 2009.
Find full text
4
New South Wales. Law Reform Commission. Unilateral severance of a joint tenancy. The Commission, 1991.
Find full text
5
New South Wales. Law Reform Commission. Unilateral severance of a joint tenancy. The Commission, 1994.
Find full text
7
Commission, New South Wales Law Reform. Unilateral severance of a joint tenancy: Discussion paper. New South Wales Law Reform Commission, 1991.
Find full text
8
Sivograkov, O. V. Kommentariĭ k Zakonu Respubliki Belarusʹ "O sovmestnom domovladenii". "Amalfei͡a︡", 2000.
Find full text
9
Calzado, María Isabel Trujillo. La Constitución convencional de comunidades : el contrato de comunicación de bienes. J.M. Bosch, 1994.
Find full text
10
Kabelková, Eva, and Pavla Schödelbauerová. Bytové spoluvlastnictví v novém občanském zákoníku: Komentář. C.H. Beck, 2013.
Find full textBook chapters on the topic "Joint tenancy"
1
Franke, Annette, and Justyna Stypinska. "Joint Tenancy and Tenancy in Common." In Encyclopedia of Gerontology and Population Aging. Springer International Publishing, 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69892-2_350-1.
Full text
2
Franke, Annette, and Justyna Stypinska. "Joint Tenancy and Tenancy in Common." In Encyclopedia of Gerontology and Population Aging. Springer International Publishing, 2021. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-22009-9_350.
Full text
3
Luther, Peter, and Alan Moran. "Law of Property (Joint Tenants) Act 1964 (1964, c. 63)." In Core Statutes on Property Law. Macmillan Education UK, 2015. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-137-54479-7_15.
Full text
4
Clarke, Sandra, and Sarah Greer. "8. Joint owners of land (co-ownership)." In Land Law Directions. Oxford University Press, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/he/9780198839811.003.0008.
Full textAbstract:
This chapter discusses ‘express’ co-ownership of land—the situation in which owners make a conscious decision to own land together. It first briefly defines the two types of co-ownership—joint tenancy and tenancy in common—and distinguishes between legal and equitable ownership. It then discusses legal title and equitable title in relation to joint tenancy and tenancy in common; and how to differentiate between joint tenancy and tenancy in common in practice. The chapter also considers the issue of severance, which converts the status of a co-owner from joint tenant to that of tenant in common, as well as the impact of co-ownership on the land register.
5
Clarke, Sandra, and Sarah Greer. "8. Joint owners of land (co-ownership)." In Land Law Directions. Oxford University Press, 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/he/9780198809555.003.0008.
Full textAbstract:
This chapter discusses ‘express’ co-ownership of land—the situation in which owners make a conscious decision to own land together. It first briefly defines the two types of co-ownership—joint tenancy and tenancy in common—and distinguishes between legal and equitable ownership. It then discusses legal title and equitable title in relation to joint tenancy and tenancy in common; and how to differentiate between joint tenancy and tenancy in common in practice. The chapter also considers the issue of severance, which converts the status of a co-owner from joint tenant to that of tenant in common, as well as the impact of co-ownership on the land register.
6
Clarke, Sandra, and Sarah Greer. "8. Joint owners of land (co-ownership)." In Land Law Directions. Oxford University Press, 2022. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/he/9780192856937.003.0008.
Full textAbstract:
This chapter discusses ‘express’ co-ownership of land—the situation in which owners make a conscious decision to own land together. It first briefly defines the two types of co-ownership—joint tenancy and tenancy in common—and distinguishes between legal and equitable ownership. It then discusses legal title and equitable title in relation to joint tenancy and tenancy in common; and how to differentiate between joint tenancy and tenancy in common in practice. The chapter also considers the issue of severance, which converts the status of a co-owner from joint tenant to that of tenant in common, as well as the impact of co-ownership on the land register.
7
McFarlane, Ben, Nicholas Hopkins, and Sarah Nield. "6. Trusts of Land." In Land Law. Oxford University Press, 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/he/9780198735328.003.0006.
Full textAbstract:
This chapter examines the legal regulation of trusts of land, with a particular focus on co-ownership trusts. It begins with a discussion of the two forms of co-ownership that exist in English law, joint tenancy and tenancy in common, as well as the ‘severance’ rules that enable a joint tenant to become a tenant in common. While joint tenants can act only collectively and their acts necessarily affect the whole of the co-owned estate, tenants in common can also act individually in relation to their own undivided shares in the estate. The chapter goes on to consider the trustees' powers, beneficiaries' rights, and the role of the court in relation to co-ownership trusts as provided by the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996. Finally, it explains how the courts resolve disputes as to whether co-owned land should be sold.
8
McFarlane, Ben, Nicholas Hopkins, and Sarah Nield. "6. Trusts of Land." In Land Law. Oxford University Press, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/he/9780198831877.003.0006.
Full textAbstract:
This chapter examines the legal regulation of trusts of land, with a particular focus on co-ownership trusts. It begins with a discussion of the two forms of co-ownership that exist in English law, joint tenancy and tenancy in common, as well as the ‘severance’ rules that enable a joint tenant to become a tenant in common. While joint tenants can act only collectively and their acts necessarily affect the whole of the co-owned estate, tenants in common can also act individually in relation to their own undivided shares in the estate. The chapter goes on to consider the trustees' powers, beneficiaries' rights, and the role of the court in relation to co-ownership trusts as provided by the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996. Finally, it explains how the courts resolve disputes between co-owners and disputes between co-owners and creditors as to whether co-owned land should be sold.
9
Nair, Aruna. "17. Co-ownership." In Textbook on Land Law. Oxford University Press, 2023. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/he/9780192858832.003.0017.
Full textAbstract:
Course-focused and comprehensive, the Textbook on Land Law provides an accessible overview of one key area on the law curriculum. This chapter discusses rules relating to the co-ownership of land. It covers the distinction between ‘joint tenancy’ and ‘tenancy in common’; how a court determines whether a joint tenancy or a tenancy in common has been created in equity, including a discussion of the impact of the leading cases of Stack v Dowden and Jones v Kernott on this issue; the severance of a joint tenancy; the relationship between co-owners; and the ending of co-ownership. The law is illustrated by reference to Mr and Mrs Armstrong (joint tenants of 1 Trant Way), six students who bought 8 Trant Way together and jointly occupy it, and a firm of chartered surveyors who jointly hold title to 10 Trant Way as their business address.
10
Smith, Roger J. "Joint Tenancy and Tenancy in Common Reviewed." In Plural Ownership. Oxford University Press, 2005. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198298526.003.0005.
Full textConference papers on the topic "Joint tenancy"
1
Tuttle, James, Yinlin Chen, Tingting Jiang, et al. "Multi-tenancy Cloud Access and Preservation." In JCDL '20: The ACM/IEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries in 2020. ACM, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3383583.3398624.
Full text
2
Sulong, J. "Joint Tenancy In The Islamic Law And Its Application In Malaysia." In INCoH 2017 - The Second International Conference on Humanities. Cognitive-Crcs, 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2019.09.42.
Full text
3
Costa, Júlio G. S. F. da, Francinaldo A. Pereira, Davi H. dos Santos, Samuel X. de Souza, and Luiz M. G. Gonçalves. "Data Modelless Microservices to increase Multi-Tenancy in BaaS and SaaS Providers with Application to a Covid-19 Data-Lake." In Anais Estendidos da Conference on Graphics, Patterns and Images. Sociedade Brasileira de Computação - SBC, 2022. http://dx.doi.org/10.5753/sibgrapi.est.2022.23284.
Full textAbstract:
This work is the result of the joint efforts of professionals encouraged to build a solution to predict the contagion and death curves of the Covid-19 pandemic, through the use of data-oriented solutions. This strategy is fundamentally dependent on collection. Regarding this particular aspect, the difficulty is manifested due to the fact that such data exist scattered in different repositories, in different formats, commonly available through files, in addition to being frequently updated. However, in this context, small data scientist teams with few resources suffer in this scenario forced to personally concern themselves with these difficulties. Here, we present a platform that helps these professionals to hide the complexities of having to deal with these issues themselves. This is done by creating and helping to manage, in an automated way, repositories for your users for simplified data consumption and distribution.
4
Tabar, Maryam, Wooyong Jung, Amulya Yadav, Owen Wilson Chavez, Ashley Flores, and Dongwon Lee. "Forecasting the Number of Tenants At-Risk of Formal Eviction: A Machine Learning Approach to Inform Public Policy." In Thirty-First International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence {IJCAI-22}. International Joint Conferences on Artificial Intelligence Organization, 2022. http://dx.doi.org/10.24963/ijcai.2022/719.
Full textAbstract:
Eviction of tenants has reached a crisis level in the U.S. and its consequences pose significant challenges to society. To tackle this eviction crisis, policymakers have been allocating financial resources but a more efficient resource allocation would need an accurate forecast of the number of tenants at-risk of evictions ahead of time. To help enhance the existing eviction prevention/diversion programs, in this work, we propose a multi-view deep neural network model, named as MARTIAN, that forecasts the number of tenants at-risk of getting formally evicted (at the census tract level) n months into the future. Then, we evaluate MARTIAN’s predictive performance under various conditions using real-world eviction cases filed across Dallas County, TX. The results of empirical evaluation show that MARTIAN outperforms an extensive set of baseline models in terms of predictive performance. Additionally, MARTIAN’s superior predictive performance is generalizable to unseen census tracts, for which no labeled data is available in the training set. This research has been done in collaboration with Child Poverty Action Lab (CPAL), which is a pioneering non-governmental organization (NGO) working for tackling poverty-related issues across Dallas County, TX. The usability of MARTIAN is under review by subject matter experts. We release our codebase at https://github.com/maryam-tabar/MARTIAN.
5
Davelaar, Maarten, Lia Van Doorn, Aly Gruppen, and Jeroen Knevel. "Welcome in my backyard: how having good neighbours can help ending homelessness." In CARPE Conference 2019: Horizon Europe and beyond. Universitat Politècnica València, 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.4995/carpe2019.2019.10194.
Full textAbstract:
In the Netherlands, the city of Utrecht is leading in providing adequate accommodation through mixed housing projects for ‘regular’ tenants and people previously living in homeless services or protected housing facilities. ‘New’ homeless persons also obtain the possibility for making a new start, instead of having to depend on shelters first. The concept of mixed housing, not to be confused with mixed income housing, relates in our definition to small and medium-sized (up to 500 residents) housing projects that are home to different groups of people who intentionally live next to each other, connect and engage in joint activities.In this paper, we examine three projects, with mainly self-contained dwellings: ‘Groene Sticht’ (since 2003), a small neighbourhood with 69 regular tenants and home-owners, and 35 ex-homeless persons; ‘Parana’ (2014), a purpose build complex with 24 regular and 44 (ex-)homeless individuals/families; ‘Majella Wonen’ (2016), older basic, post-war dwellings with 39 regular tenants and 35 homeless persons/families. These price-winning projects, co-created by a homeless service, social integration services and a social housing provider are built on an innovative concept of social management, with a high level of self-organisation. All residents are fully eligible members of the residents-committees and take responsibility for activities such as festivities, gardening, and the selection of new tenants. If necessary, ex-homeless inhabitants receive individualised support.We discuss structures and mechanisms that help homeless people feel at home amidst their (new) neighbours and foster their social integration. In addition, we identify several tensions that hamper integration and analyse the ways in which both residents and professionals try to tackle these obstacles.We collected data (2016 -2018) through the participatory meetings of a Community of Practice on Mixed housing, the study of documents, in-depth interviews with inhabitants of the housing complexes, focus group-sessions with professionals and interviews with local stakeholders.Based on this research we will apply for follow up funding. Through national funds and/or European funds.
6
Nasiriani, Neda, George Kesidis, and Di Wang. "Public Cloud Differential Pricing Design Under Provider and Tenants Joint Demand Response." In e-Energy '18: The Ninth International Conference on Future Energy Systems. ACM, 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3208903.3208938.
Full text
7
Bezemer, Cor-Paul, and Andy Zaidman. "Multi-tenant SaaS applications." In the Joint ERCIM Workshop on Software Evolution (EVOL) and International Workshop on Principles of Software Evolution (IWPSE). ACM Press, 2010. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1862372.1862393.
Full text
8
Xu Cheng, Yuliang Shi, and Qingzhong Li. "A multi-tenant oriented performance monitoring, detecting and scheduling architecture based on SLA." In 2009 Joint Conferences on Pervasive Computing (JCPC). IEEE, 2009. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/jcpc.2009.5420114.
Full text
9
Grandi, Matteo, Daniel Camps-Mur, August Betzler, Joan Josep Aleixendri, and Miguel Catalan-Cid. "SWAM: SDN-Based Wi-Fi Small Cells with Joint Access-Backhaul and Multi-Tenant Capabilities." In 2018 IEEE/ACM 26th International Symposium on Quality of Service (IWQoS). IEEE, 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/iwqos.2018.8624129.
Full text
10
Ellis, Todd. "Security As a Service for Rail Applications." In 2020 Joint Rail Conference. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.1115/jrc2020-8027.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract State-of-the-art rail systems require reliant, redundant and critical and secure communications. Data integrity is paramount when considering the criticality that the data payload remains secure for 24/7 year-round applications. With technologies such as Communications Based Train Control (CBTC) and Positive Train Control (PTC) being implemented, considerations for data integrity in these networks must include methods to avoid internal and external vulnerabilities. Unlike traditional encryption methodologies, newer techniques involve tunneling payloads across open or closed networks; this method could include public unsecured networks. By utilizing a unique security appliance tunneled to a remotely connected network operations center, it is possible for a rail system to subscribe to a service to obtain military-grade data security capabilities and distribute secured communications throughout their operational territories via low cost data networks. This “security as a service” concept is especially useful for landlord/tenant relationships that would have previously resulted in duplicative system elements. Security-as-a-service encryption methods commercially available for rail applications typically fall into one of three color-coded categories; green, red and gray. Green networks offer a single layer solution using NSA-approved cryptographic algorithms and are completely isolated from other methods. Red networks are highly secure, utilizing diverse layers of different algorithm types. Gray networks provide a secure gateway between red and green networks to effectively manage network and operational risks. In the case of large freight territories, security as a service can help reduce network costs while improving security. For passenger rail systems, communication-based signaling systems should be strongly protected against data vulnerabilities resulting from either unintentional or malicious access to critical networks.