Search results

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

Index by subjects, compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals: Facilities Volumes 8‐17; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐17; Property Management Volumes 8‐17; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐17.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐17; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐17; Property Management Volumes 8‐17; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐17.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐17; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐17; Property Management Volumes 8‐17; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐17.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐17; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐17; Property Management Volumes 8‐17; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐17.

The purpose of this paper is to contrast consumer laws in England and Australia in relation to residential building projects, and considers how the laws of England may be improved in light of the Australian laws.

The paper reviews consumer laws in both England and Australia, and examines the measures that are in place (or not) to protect consumers who engage builders or purchase a home that contains latent defects.

After comparing the laws of the two countries, the conclusion is made that English law could be improved by imposing regulations on builders, including by mandating the use of written contracts for building work which are required to contain particular terms, requiring builders to be licensed and insured, and by introducing a consumer‐friendly form of dispute resolution for home building disputes.

The paper recommends that there be law reform in England.

The paper provides (so far as the authors are aware) the first comparison of English and Australian consumer laws in relation to residential building work.

The owner of residential long leasehold can be significantly affected by construction operations to the building, whether during its initial construction or its subsequent repair, renovation or improvement. This paper aims to consider how a leaseholder has an interest in such construction operations and the extent to which this is taken into consideration in their procurement.

The paper is a general review of how construction law interfaces with property law interests, rights and obligations in the case of a residential leaseholder. The first part of the paper outlines the issues raised by construction operations. The second part of the paper queries the efficacy of any right of redress the leaseholder might have in respect of construction defects. The third part considers the limited nature of the leaseholder’s right to be consulted about construction operations. The paper is predominantly doctrinal in approach, although it references socio-legal research. The paper also contrasts the English law position with Australia.

The paper concludes that leaseholders have limited input into the procurement of construction operations despite their interest in them. Property law can be used to regulate construction law operations.

To date, the literature dealing specifically with the position of leaseholders, consultation obligations and construction operations has been limited. This paper brings together property law and construction law in analysing the findings of the Hackitt Report into the Grenfell Tower disaster.

The aim of this paper is to survey some of the “hotspots” of potential Y2K‐related legal liability, as well as some of the Y2K regulatory requirements of which organisations need to be aware.