Fundamentals of the property law Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Fundamentals of the shoes law - Essay ExampleIn this case, Mal have ownership right rights over the land and he can transfer it to every one he may wish. In this case he has decided to transfer the land to Sam, where he has sold the land at a total of $120000. In the case Gunana v Northern Territory (2007) 153 FCR 349 at 83, there was determination of the owner of the title of the land. But the owners of the land had reconsider their honours to the effect of the operation of the aborigine Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act 1976 (Cth) (the ALRA). The act was on the operation of the Fisheries Act 1988 (NT) and the powers of the director of the fisheries had to appoint pursuant to act in the legislation. The court judgment was that land was fully owned by the traditional Aboriginal owners. The ALRA held that the owner has the right to exclusive possession of both the water and the land. This stated that since the owner was devoted the fishing license, no one else was authorized to fish in the land and also in the water. If someone wanted to access the land, one had to obtain permission from the owner (Strelein 2010) In the case Northern Territory of Australia & Anor v Arnhem Land Aboriginal Land Trust & Ors (2008) HCA 29, the court ruled that the owner of the land had exclusive rights over the possession of the land. The owner had all the marine lieu within the land. ... The owner had no right to exclude other people who had been given the same title and who were the native holders of the title. It was also decided that the owner was not allowed to deny the native holders of the title the right to fish and hunt (McHugh 2011). The legal issue in this case is that, initially, Mal was the owner of the property. Since he agreed to sell the property to Sam and he also signed the transfer forms, the property no longer belonged to him. When Mal also agreed to sign the letter for the authorization of the delivery of the security measure to Sam, he had already made his decision to sell the property to Sam, though Sam had not yet paid him the money. Mal should not claim that he was tricked by the Harrys solicitors since he had agreed to be paid later by Sam. If he wanted to claim the money from Sam, he would have given him the conditions of selling the property. He would not have agreed to sell the property on credit. Though they had made an agreement that Sam was to pay him at the leftover of six weeks, Harry has a right of claiming the certificate so that he can lend the money to Sam. Question two The question is based on Absolute, determinable and conditional interests. Absolute grants refer to interests which no conditions are attached. In this grant, there is no requirement of either non occurrence or occurrence of any situation or any particular or given military issue. When the grant is determinable, it means that the interests will be automatically terminated on the occurrence of the event which was specified. In determinable grant t he following words are used during, while, until and as long as. In any case the event becomes impossible, the interest automatically becomes absolute (Clarke and Kohler 2005). A grant can