Reflective Learning Journal

Hence, this provided me the basic understanding that all forms of property rights are tied to the land and are dependant upon the existence of the property or the land.My study of legislation also made me aware of the implications of the Land Registration Act of 2002 on property ownership. For instance, this Act has impacted upon adverse possession which earlier allowed non-owners in the undisputed occupation of land for a period of more than twelve years to claim ownership rights to the land. I was able to appreciate the significance of the Pye v Graham case in this respect and the implications of legislative changes such as the Land Registration Act and the Human Rights Act of 1998. The Land Registration Act requires that any claim for adverse possession will not automatically subsist, because the actual owner of the land will have the right to register an objection on the move towards adverse possession.The Pye v Graham decision was also recently challenged by Pye, the owner of the land, in the European Court of Human Rights, which held that adverse possession against registered land would infringe on the guarantee of free enjoyment of possessions as spelled out under the First Protocol of the European Convention of Human Rights. Since the rights guaranteed under the European Convention of Human Rights have also been incorporated into UK law through the Human Rights Act of 1998, this has also impacted upon property law in placing a greater emphasis on ensuring that basic human rights are upheld. For example, where multiple occupancy housing is concerned, it has now become mandatory for landlords to obtain licenses certifying the fitness of the building for occupation. This helps to ensure that the standards of repair and management in multi-occupancy homes are maintained to a good standard so that the rights of the occupants to basic amenities and building standards are ensured.This module also helped to understand the distinction between a lease on a property and a license. This has often caused confusion about whether an agreement actually creates a lease or a tenancy. for instance, in the case of Addiscombe Garden Estates Limited v Crabbe,an agreement described as a license was actually a tenancy. A tenancy was clearly set out in the case of Street v Mountford as consisting of the following rights: (a) enjoying exclusive possession of the premises for a term (b) for a term and (c) the payment of a certain rent.