This thesis examines fraud as a basis for the voidability of transfers in Scots law. In particular, it focuses on misrepresentation and fraud on creditors. In so doing, an attempt is made to provide a principled account of the effect of fraud on transfer which can explain the well-established rules in this area, show how these rules fit within the broader framework of private law and provide some guidance as to the appropriate result in cases where a rule is not clearly established. This account depends on examining the development of the law from a historical and comparative perspective, with particular emphasis on the periods during which the relevant rules and institutions were being developed or received in Scotland and on the links between this process and the wider ius commune tradition. The central contention is that avoidance of a transfer on the basis of fraud is justified by a personal right held by the party at whose instance the avoidance takes place. In the core cases, this personal right is a right to reparation for a wrong for which the transferee is liable. At the periphery, the personal right may arise from the law of unjustified enrichment rather than from the law of delict. This characterisation of the basis of avoidance explains the protection afforded to subsequent acquirers and the limited effect which avoidance has in certain circumstances. It shows the interaction between the law of property and the law of obligations in this area and enables principles developed in the context of one instance of fraud on creditors to be applied to difficult problems in relation to other instances.

<p> </p><p>Denna uppsats syftar till att undersöka den nya bostadsformen ägarlägenhet och de befintliga ägandeformerna bostadsrätt och småhus. En komparation har gjorts mellan dessa tre ägandeformer gällande juridiska och ekonomiska frågor. Våra nordiska grannländers ägarlägenheter har också undersökts.</p><p> </p><p>Ägarlägenheten är enligt lagstiftaren ett "radhus på höjden", det vill säga en lägenhet i ett flerbostadshus som betraktas så som ett småhus. För att undersöka ägarlägenheten har den rättsvetenskapliga metoden använts. Litteratur inom området har behandlats med propositionen till lagändringarna gällande ägarlägenhet (2008/09:91) som främsta grund.</p><p> </p><p>Skillnaderna mellan bostadsrätten, småhuset och ägarlägenheten varierar beroende på sakfråga. De största variationerna är att bostadsrättsägaren endast innehar en del i föreningen med nyttjanderätt till sin lägenhet som är lös egendom enligt köplagen (1990:931). Småhuset och ägarlägenheten är fast egendom och faller under jordabalkens (1970:994) regler. i en bostadsrätt måste föreningen godkänna in- och utträde av medlemmar vid överlåtelse, för småhusägaren tillika ägarlägenhetsägaren krävs det inget godkännande. Andrahandsuthyrning är fritt för småhus- eller ägarlägenhetsägaren medan det krävs godkännande från bostadsrättsföreningen vid bostadsrättsinnehav.</p>

No description available.

No description available.

Denna uppsats syftar till att undersöka den nya bostadsformen ägarlägenhet och de befintliga ägandeformerna bostadsrätt och småhus. En komparation har gjorts mellan dessa tre ägandeformer gällande juridiska och ekonomiska frågor. Våra nordiska grannländers ägarlägenheter har också undersökts.   Ägarlägenheten är enligt lagstiftaren ett "radhus på höjden", det vill säga en lägenhet i ett flerbostadshus som betraktas så som ett småhus. För att undersöka ägarlägenheten har den rättsvetenskapliga metoden använts. Litteratur inom området har behandlats med propositionen till lagändringarna gällande ägarlägenhet (2008/09:91) som främsta grund.   Skillnaderna mellan bostadsrätten, småhuset och ägarlägenheten varierar beroende på sakfråga. De största variationerna är att bostadsrättsägaren endast innehar en del i föreningen med nyttjanderätt till sin lägenhet som är lös egendom enligt köplagen (1990:931). Småhuset och ägarlägenheten är fast egendom och faller under jordabalkens (1970:994) regler. i en bostadsrätt måste föreningen godkänna in- och utträde av medlemmar vid överlåtelse, för småhusägaren tillika ägarlägenhetsägaren krävs det inget godkännande. Andrahandsuthyrning är fritt för småhus- eller ägarlägenhetsägaren medan det krävs godkännande från bostadsrättsföreningen vid bostadsrättsinnehav.

No description available.

No description available.

Properties are bought and sold daily, which means that it is of great importance with rules that regulate the acquisition. The rules on who should be held liable for a property brought to a head when the acquisition relates to a property that is loaded with contaminated soil. The purpose with this thesis is to investigate who could be held liable for contaminated land and also whether an exclusion clause can affect the separation of responsibilities. Two different liabilities can occur depending on which law that should be applicable, MB or JB. MB's rules apply to anyone who may be subject to decontamination responsibilities, which is regulated in Chapter 10. MB. The rules state that a decontamination responsibility attaches to one or more operators, or one or more property owners. In assessing whether contamination exists and whom to be considered responsible, an assessment is made along the facts of the case. JB's rules apply to what can be considered as defects in a property, the rules in JB is therefore crucial to whether the pollution could be considered as an error. Different circumstances are important when deciding what party that should be liable, like the agreement between the parties, the buyer’s obligation to examine the property and the seller’s duty to inform the buyer. All factors are important when deciding who to be held liable. The separation of responsibilities is important when deciding whether the buyer has an opportunity to refer to different sanction against the seller. An exclusion clause can to some extent affect the separation of responsibilities. This is valid both for the decontamination responsibilities under MB and the rules in JB. Some facts should be considered when an exclusion clause is written, since it may be annulled or adjusted if certain conditions exist.

This thesis addresses the question of how conventions and other instruments regulating court jurisdiction should deal with court proceedings relating to arbitration. It argues that the conventional approach of excluding court proceedings related to arbitration entirely from the scope of the jurisdiction instrument cannot be justified with reference to any international arbitration convention. It continues to argue that the exclusion of arbitration causes or exacerbates significant problems at the interface between the courts and arbitration, taking the European Union’s recent experience as an example. It then argues that the European legislature has recently directly considered the exclusion of arbitration from its jurisdictional instruments and failed to act effectively. Any amendments to this system will necessarily be offered within the relevant legal context, so an assessment of the prevailing principles in European international private law and international commercial arbitration will follow. Furthermore, the ongoing debate surrounding the delocalisation of arbitration and its relevance to the debate about the interface between court jurisdiction and arbitration shall be addressed. Finally, this thesis proposes a model for inclusion of arbitration in the European jurisdiction instrument (the Brussels I Regulation) that would, it is argued, solve or ameliorate the problems at the interface between the Regulation and arbitration, whilst broadly aligning with the prevailing principles in the relevant legal context. The thesis then considers whether this approach could be extended beyond Europe to the world at large, concluding that it could not. This work therefore takes an original approach to a topic of much contemporary controversy, by taking a holistic, rounded, and reasoned view of the problems at the interface between court jurisdiction and arbitration. It also contains original insights into several other areas, including the historical justification for the exclusion of arbitration from jurisdiction conventions, the importance of mutual trust as a founding principle of the common market, the relevance of the delocalisation debate to the topic, and the proposal for reform advanced at the end of this thesis.

South Africa has banned corporal punishment in every setting, except for one, the home. Despite having ratified international conventions where in corporal punishment is abolished, South Africa is yet to abolish it and adopt legislation to support and sustain the ban on corporal chastisement. South Africa has not been completely mute on the topic of corporal punishment in the home. More than a decade ago there was a proposition to abolish corporal punishment and include it in the then Children’s Bill in clause 139. However, this clause never saw the light of day. A similar attempt to amend the Children’s Act has very recently been abolished leaving the common law defense known as ‘reasonable chastisement’ available to parents. The recent case that re-sparked this contentious debate is the YG v S (2018 (1) SACR 64 (GJ)). The High Court mero motu considered the constitutionality of the common law defense and in the end found it to be unconstitutional. In an unexpected move, one of the applicants applied to the Constitutional Court for both standing and leave to appeal and judgment has been reserved. This mini-dissertation explores the many aspects with regards to corporal punishment by evaluating the international conventions, legislation and case law. A limited comparative component is included and some of the physiological effects of corporal punishment on children are considered. The focus is however on the YG case in the hope that it paved the way to change the defense of ‘reasonable’ chastisement. This defense defies children’s rights and is therefore unreasonable. / Mini Dissertation (LLM)--University of Pretoria, 2019. / Private Law / LLM / Unrestricted