a. The ultimate legal claim or right to ownership would typically belong to the government or sovereign authority of the jurisdiction, as they have the power to regulate and enforce property rights.
b. It is highly unlikely to own real property "outright" without any qualifications at all. Even if one were to acquire a property through purchase or inheritance, there are usually legal requirements and restrictions imposed by the government, such as paying taxes, adhering to zoning regulations, or respecting environmental laws.
c. The answer to (b) above may not be desirable for some individuals, as it implies that owning real property comes with responsibilities and limitations. However, from a societal perspective, having qualifications and regulations ensures that land use is controlled and balanced in a way that benefits the community as a whole.
d. The problem which arises out of relativity of title is primarily a problem of proof of having the legal right. It is essential to establish and document one's legal claim to a property to avoid disputes or challenges from others who claim a greater right. The legal system provides mechanisms and processes for proving ownership, such as title deeds, registrations, and court proceedings, to resolve disputes and establish clear ownership rights.
5. It has been suggested that the concept of “title” in respect of owning real property in a
common law jurisdiction is a relative proposition. In other words, one’s ownership is only as
good as someone else’s greater right to a legal claim. If this is true,
a. Who has the ultimate legal claim or right to ownership?
b. Is it possible to ever own real property “outright” without any qualifications at all?
c. Is your answer to (b) above desirable?
d. Is the problem which arises out of relativity of title a problem of legal right or a problem
in proof of having that legal right?
1 answer
1 answer