DOCTRINE OF TENURE INTRO CONCEPTS Dif ference between real and personal property Real property is land and everything attached (f i xtures) - including: . the surface layer of the earth and all attached physical things (corporeal hereditaments) · rights to airspace above the land · intangible rights over land (incorporeal hereditaments) - eg a right of way over land, a right to cut and take trees Personal property are things not attached to and forming part of land (chattels) Includes leases in respect of land, which are chattels real Traditional Classif i cation of Property Realty (immovable): · Corporeal (permanent) Hereditaments - eg f i xtures · Incorporeal (intangible) Hereditaments - eg easements, prof i ts, mortgages Hereditaments are property interests that can be inherited Personalty (moveable): · Chattels real - eg leases · Chattels personal o Choses in possession - eg books, furniture o Choses in action - eg patents, shares, copyright Dif ference between property rights and (personal) contractual rights Personal rights - exercisable by the holder only against the person who granted that right eg rights in contract (privity of contract) Proprietary rights - one exercisable by the owner against the world Different people may have different interests in respect of the same parcel of land - which give dif ferent rights eg leases, easements, mortgages - and fee simple A spectacle was held not to amount to a proprietary right which the law would protect (this is not a principle) Victoria Park Racing and Recreation Grounds Co Ltd v Taylor 1 FACTS: A landowner sought an injunction to restrain D from making unauthorised broadcasts describing races which had been run on the P racecourse. D in that case did not pay to enter land with consent, but rather built a tower outside boundaries that allowed him to see inside and broadcast accordingly. Argument was made that injunction should be granted because there was property in the spectacle > HELD: no. It has been argued that by the expenditure of money the P has created a spectacle and that it therefore has what is described as a quasi-property in the spectacle which the law will protect. If ind dif f i culty in attaching any meaning of property in a spectacle. A spectacle cannot be owned. Even if there were legal principle which prevented one person from creating an advantage for himself or causing damage to another by describing a spectacle, the rights of the latter person could only be described as property only in a metaphorical Adam McRae LLB303 - Real Property
sense. Any appropriateness in the metaphor would demand upon the existence of the legal principle. The principle cannot itself be based upon such a metaphor Before a right or interest can be admitted into the category of property, or of a right af f ecting property, it must be def inable, identif i able by third parties, capacity in its nature of assumption by third parties and have some degree of permanence or