Topic 4 - Landownership 3 4 5-Property Law, Lecture notes of Property Law

Download Topic 4 - Landownership 3 4 5-Property Law and more Lecture notes Property Law in PDF only on Docsity!

3/6/25, about:blank 1 PM Topic 4 - Landownership 3 4 5 Land Ownership —Part 3,4 &5 Part 3: Common Interest Implied in certain limited situations. In the nature of things that the utility of property ‘may depend on the proper maintenance of another's property — law recognises that have common interest in that other person's property rises where "a single thing...is owned in separate units and by different people, so that the interests of one proprietor may be adversely affected by the activity or neglect of another" (Reid, Law of Property in Scotland, para. 355) Most common examples are between proprictors of flats in tenements and riparian proprietors (those bounding on water) the law recognises that all owners have shared/common interest in the maintenance and management of whole thing Right short of ownership but does entitle those that have common interest to exercise some control over the property belonging to others. In a tenement, the lower proprietors have an obligation of support the higher proprietors and the upper proprietors have an obligation of shelter to those below - (Tenements (Scotland) Act 2004, s. 8). Lower proprietors may be interdicted from carrying out any work which would prejudice the support of the other flats e.g. demolishing loaning walls. The owner of the upper flat is obliged to maintain it in wind and watertight condition. Onerous condition and in practice varied in titles Riparian proprietors (proprietors whose property is bounded by a river) The law implies that each owner owns the riverbed up to the mid-point of the river. These proprietors have an obligation not to interfere with river's natural flow for example by damming it or diverting it except that they can each take water for domestic use. Morris v Bicket (1864) 2 M 1082 - the parties owned land on opposite banks of river. Pursuer agreed that the defender could build onto the riverbed which ‘was owned by the respective parties to the midpoint of the river, but the defender built further out, and the court held that there was no right to build on to the riverbed even to protect your own bank if this might affect the flow of the water. No need to prove an actual affect on the flow as this is unpredictable. Proprietors of parts of non-tidal lochs have a right to use whole loch allowing them to sail and fish in it practical rule i Law recognises various other instances of common interest — proprietors of buildings sharing gable wall have a common interest in support from each other. 119