保护澳大利亚的观点:普通法原则、限制性公约和规划法

IF 1.2 Q1 LAW
B. Grigg, H. Esmaeili
{"title":"保护澳大利亚的观点:普通法原则、限制性公约和规划法","authors":"B. Grigg, H. Esmaeili","doi":"10.53637/xdmw8873","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Views over land and waters may significantly enhance a property’s value. The common law has declined, however, to recognise the proprietary nature of a view, regarding it as a matter only of delight. This article evaluates the Australian position on the right to a view and considers mechanisms for its protection. It first examines the difficulties in using easements to protect a view. Then it considers the restrictive covenant as a basis for protecting a view, notwithstanding complications under Australian Torrens title systems and contemporary public planning schemes in most Australian jurisdictions that can override restrictive covenants. It then considers public land use planning law and concludes that it may be the most effective legal avenue for protecting a view in Australia, though it notes that the settings of the relevant planning instrument will be crucial in determining whether a particular right to a view will be protected.","PeriodicalId":45951,"journal":{"name":"UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES LAW JOURNAL","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Protecting a View in Australia: Common Law Principles, Restrictive Covenants and Planning Law\",\"authors\":\"B. Grigg, H. Esmaeili\",\"doi\":\"10.53637/xdmw8873\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Views over land and waters may significantly enhance a property’s value. The common law has declined, however, to recognise the proprietary nature of a view, regarding it as a matter only of delight. This article evaluates the Australian position on the right to a view and considers mechanisms for its protection. It first examines the difficulties in using easements to protect a view. Then it considers the restrictive covenant as a basis for protecting a view, notwithstanding complications under Australian Torrens title systems and contemporary public planning schemes in most Australian jurisdictions that can override restrictive covenants. It then considers public land use planning law and concludes that it may be the most effective legal avenue for protecting a view in Australia, though it notes that the settings of the relevant planning instrument will be crucial in determining whether a particular right to a view will be protected.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45951,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES LAW JOURNAL\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES LAW JOURNAL\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.53637/xdmw8873\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES LAW JOURNAL","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.53637/xdmw8873","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

可以看到陆地和水域的景观可以显著提高房产的价值。然而,普通法拒绝承认一种观点的所有权性质,认为它只是一种快乐的事情。本文评估了澳大利亚对发表意见权的立场,并考虑了保护这一权利的机制。本文首先探讨了使用地役权来保护景观的困难。然后,它认为限制性公约是保护景观的基础,尽管澳大利亚托伦斯产权制度和大多数澳大利亚司法管辖区的当代公共规划计划可以推翻限制性公约。然后审议了公共土地使用规划法,并得出结论认为,这可能是澳大利亚保护景观最有效的法律途径,尽管它指出,相关规划文书的设置对于确定特定的景观权是否受到保护至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Protecting a View in Australia: Common Law Principles, Restrictive Covenants and Planning Law
Views over land and waters may significantly enhance a property’s value. The common law has declined, however, to recognise the proprietary nature of a view, regarding it as a matter only of delight. This article evaluates the Australian position on the right to a view and considers mechanisms for its protection. It first examines the difficulties in using easements to protect a view. Then it considers the restrictive covenant as a basis for protecting a view, notwithstanding complications under Australian Torrens title systems and contemporary public planning schemes in most Australian jurisdictions that can override restrictive covenants. It then considers public land use planning law and concludes that it may be the most effective legal avenue for protecting a view in Australia, though it notes that the settings of the relevant planning instrument will be crucial in determining whether a particular right to a view will be protected.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
7.70%
发文量
25
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信