Search results

An appraisal is normally conducted to determine financial viability of property development projects for several purposes. The residual valuation method is normally used to appraise such projects and the purpose of the paper is to examine its financial viability decision rules (FVDRs) used by practitioners.

The qualitative research approach was adopted based on the case study strategy of enquiry where 48 development appraisal reports from 37 Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors registered firms in London were accessed from the internet and critically reviewed.

Site-specific and area-wide development appraisals for planning purposes dominated the reports. Five FVDRs were identified. A development project is financially viable if: (i) computed residual profit expressed as a percentage return is equal to or greater than a determined market benchmark risk-adjusted return; (ii) computed residual profit expressed as a percentage return is positive; (iii) calculated residual land value is greater than open market land value or benchmark land value; (iv) computed residual land value is positive; and (v) there is a surplus when appraisal cost variables including land costs plus allowance for developer’s profit are deducted from gross development value. In some reports, it was discovered some appraisal cost variables were excluded whilst others were inappropriately treated.

The first and third FVDRs are reasonable whilst the remaining are fraught with problems and using them can make development projects that are financially unviable to be viable. Also, excluding relevant cost variables and treating some inappropriately understate the appraisal cost component resulting in incorrect financial viability outcomes. These can lead to wrong recommendations about financial viability being proffered that negatively affect the practitioners’ clientele. The dominance of development appraisals for planning purposes shows the important role development appraisals continue to play in the English planning system.

To the best of the author’s knowledge, it is the first time FVDRs in development appraisals have been systematically investigated in England with resultant new empirical findings and arguments.

This chapter examines World War II and its impact on international and military law. It covers the war’s key crimes, the Nürnberg and Tokyo tribunals, and the creation of the United Nations, the Four Geneva Conventions of 1949, and the Genocide Convention of 1948.

This chapter explores the nature of military law and IHL during the cold war period. It explores what treaties were completed, Additional Protocols I and II of the 1949 Geneva Conventions, the ad hoc international tribunals of the 1990s and 2000s, and examines the ICJ’s ruling of the legality of nuclear weapons.

This chapter examines the explosion in International Humanitarian Law between the US Civil War and World War I. The primary foci are the Hague Conventions on land warfare and the Geneva Conventions for the sick and wounded. This body of treaties is the foundation of IHL and the modern laws of war. Most of central issues in the international laws of war emerge in this period.

This chapter examines how the nature of World War I catalyzed significant changes in the laws of war, the Treaty of Versailles, the failed Leipzig Trials, and the multiple treaties enacted in the 1920s, with particular focus on the Geneva Convention of 1929.

This chapter summarizes both volumes of A Socio-legal History of the Laws of War. It reexamines the key themes and how they are interconnected. It closes with a consideration of the value of international law, especially the laws of war, and what may lie ahead.

The purpose of this paper is to bring clarity to the concept of piercing the veil of incorporation in Mauritius. This will allow students, researchers, academics and practitioners to engage further in research on the topic of incorporation of companies.

To conduct the study, the doctrinal legal research approach will be used. The inquiry will examine the numerous laws and case laws that permit the lifting of the corporate veil, so exposing the agents of the corporation to accountability on both a criminal and civil level. A comparison of Mauritius and the UK legal systems will be conducted to assess the efficacy of the former.

There are significant loopholes in the legislative framework of Mauritius regarding various corporate offences that are highly encouraged because of the limited circumstances under which courts may lift the corporate veil. There is a need for specific legislation to be enacted by Parliament to address these specific offences. Inspiration should be drawn from the UK’s robust legislative framework on the matter.

Literature on the subject in Mauritius deals mostly with factual information on the doctrine of separate legal personality and the various exceptions under which the veil of incorporation may be lifted. However, there is a scarcity of research on the various fraudulent activities and their implications on the company that go unnoticed and unpunished because of loopholes in the legal framework. This paper attempts to fill this important gap.

This paper argues for the inclusion of Indigenous research methodologies in diversity scholarship to (1) adequately account for and value the identity, lived experiences and concerns of Indigenous Peoples and (2) to enrich diversity theorising and scholarship by proposing new ways to think about and conduct research on difference, inclusion and belonging. We further highlight the roles non-Indigenous researchers can play in supporting Indigenous methodologies.

We introduce EDI readers to Indigenous research methodologies through explicating two Indigenous (Maori) methodologies from Aotearoa New Zealand and demonstrating points of convergence and divergence from existing methodologies evident in diversity scholarship.

The application of Eurocentric methodologies, including postcolonial approaches, can inaccurately theorise Indigenous experience through a Western lens compounding the ongoing impacts of colonialism. Conversely, drawing primarily from cultural knowledge and traditions, Indigenous methodologies place considerable value on people and place, relationships and relational accountabilities, each underpinned by an explicit intent to produce research with positive transformative potential for participant communities. Using Kaupapa Maori and Mana Wahine research as examples, we highlight how elements of “resistance” aligns with critical theories, but the “difference” inherent in Indigenous methodologies enables a more authentic engagement with people and place that is critical to understanding issues of significance to Indigenous Peoples.

This paper addresses the lack of engagement with Indigenous research methodologies and priorities of Indigenous communities within diversity scholarship. We argue that Indigenous priorities make broader contributions to the diversity agenda by attributing deeper meaning to difference and resistance as enacted through the context specificity of the Indigenous world. We contend Indigenous methodologies illuminate unique perspectives and priorities that can make powerful contributions to broader discussions of equity, inclusion and belonging.