Search results

This chapter addresses the main issues regulating property rights in Kosovo, with particular attention given to the public property. Through this chapter, an effort will be made to present a short historical overview of property forms in Kosovo, especially its transformation from one kind to another in the past as a part of former Yugoslavia, during the period of the 90s and for the period of UNMIK Administration, as well as an objective reflection of the current state of the legislation of the Republic of Kosovo with concern to public property.

The authors carried out a desk review of academic literature, national and international regulation, reports provided by international institutions and other available important resources. Besides the theoretical review of international and local literature, legislation in Kosovo and other relevant documents, the chapter focusses on practical research by analysing the relevant legal property acts in Kosovo and the current situation in ownership and property rights, nidificate legal vacuum and existing weaknesses.

The legal acts in Kosovo have not sufficiently regulated state property’s status, so the question of which level of power is competent to manage state property has become an object of various interpretations.

The authors herein propose a few measures to regulate real property right with special attention to one public property.

The authors define the need to regulate property forms in Kosovo and their harmonisation, such as undertaking the proper coordinated steps to have an adequate property rights regime.

In the case of Poiret & Anor v Seychelles Pension Fund & Anor (2022), the Court of Appeal, the highest court in Seychelles, took judicial notice of the fact that “[c]ommon law relationships are more prevalent in our society than those between married persons.” In this chapter, the author discusses the law relating to common law marriages in Seychelles by focusing on the following issues: the right to form a family (as a background to understanding common law marriages); requirements for a valid common law marriage; and the rights of parties in a common law marriage. These rights include “court granted” rights and “statutory rights” such as property rights (parties invoking the claim of unjust enrichment in the 1979 Civil Code and property orders and succession under the 2021 Civil Code at the dissolution of common law marriages). I also deal with the remedy of unjust enrichment in the context of the 2021 Civil Code; marital privilege (in case where one of the parties in a common law relationship is accused of committing an offence); and termination of a common law marriage. The author demonstrates the measures taken by courts and the legislators to protect some of the rights of people in common law marriages. The author suggests ways in which courts can interpret the relevant provisions of the 2021 Civil Code. Where necessary, the author highlights how courts or legislators in some African countries such as Kenya, Mauritius, Malawi, Tanzania, Sierra Leone, Ghana, Zambia, South Africa, Namibia, Rwanda, and Uganda have approached some of the issues above.

This study aims to investigate beneficial right as a new legal concept and term accepted by the Indonesian legal system. The new concept was ratified to endorse government decision to use ṣukūk (as an Islamic financial instrument) in the financing of state budget deficit. Some legal issues emerged after the ratification such as the necessity to synchronize the beneficial right with other property rights in Indonesia and the disharmony between laws related to sovereign ṣukūk issuance.

The study uses a qualitative method with library study and interviews with relevant legal experts in Indonesia as the data collection techniques.

The findings show that the passage of Sovereign Ṣukūk Law 2008 that ratified beneficial right deemed as a concession point by the government to solve conflicts between legal restriction and employment of state-owned assets as the underlying asset of sovereign ṣukūk. The study deemed the necessity to improve the use of beneficial right in the Indonesian legal system which by the concept is not exercised for the issuance of sovereign ṣukūk only. There is the need to harmonize the administration of this right with other property rights in Indonesia.

The scope of study will be limited to the Indonesian regulation related to the use of beneficial right concept in the issuance of sovereign ṣukūk in Indonesia. The regulation as mentioned will be in the form of statutes, presidential or ministerial regulations, and also opinions of Indonesian legal and sharīʿah scholars regarding the matter.

This study may explore significantly the use of beneficial right for the issuance of sovereign ṣukūk by the Government of Indonesia. Specifically, the study reveals and addresses the issues that are following the ratification of beneficial rights originated from the common law system into the Indonesian civil law system.

The purpose of this paper is to consider the effect of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002 on the property rights of third parties, by evaluating whether the interpretation of the scheme of the PMLA, 2002 results in a deprivation of rights, by virtue of the provision for the provisional attachment of property.[AQ3] In doing so, this paper attempts to consider two sub-categories of third parties that stand affected by §5 of the PMLA, 2002.

Primarily the authors analyse diverging judgements and case law across various high courts to evaluate the position of law with regards to attachment of property. To reach a precise legal conclusion, the authors consider the composite scheme of the PMLA, 2002 in their analysis.

It has been concluded that there is a clear lack of judicial cohesion in the interpretation of the PMLA, 2002, and in the absence of a judgement by the Supreme Court of India, enforcement authorities have failed to correctly identify the boundaries of the offence of money laundering, resulting in a dangerous deprivation of rights.

This paper fills a vacuum of detailed scholarship on anti-money laundering provisions in India, while also being contemporaneously relevant, as it considers the effects of the PMLA, 2002 on bona fide economic transactions and secured creditors.

This study aims to investigate key aspects of public ownership of land, expropriation and compensation laws and practices in Ethiopia with special reference to Burayu Town.

A mixed research technique of descriptive and analytic approach is applied in the research. This study used a purposive sampling technique to select case study counties and a systematic method for sampling households. Questionnaire surveys, focus group discussions, interviews and observations were used to collect empirical data. Average, percentage and paired-sample t-test analyses are used for quantitative data analysis.

Significant discrepancies exist between the expropriation laws and how property valuation and compensation are practiced in Ethiopia. The findings include the arbitrariness in designating public interest status to projects; unfair property valuation practice that neglects location factor to determine market value due to a skewed understanding of public ownership of land; and the assignment of property valuators who have no valuation expertise and proper knowledge of expropriation related laws. Findings revealed the socio-economic status of expropriated households has deteriorated due to the expropriation of their landholding.

It was difficult to locate the relocated persons as they were resettled in different localities. Furthermore, the town officers were not forthcoming to provide complete information on the expropriation and compensation procedures they followed. However, this study overcame the limitations through persistent requests and availing time for the data gathering.

The findings indicated the need to redefine relationships between public ownership of land, public interest and expropriation of landholding. A proper understanding of the triad will pave the way for better expropriation practice in Ethiopia and in countries where land is under public ownership.

The social implication of the study revealed that the socio-economic situation of relocated persons was adversely affected due to the poor implementation of laws.

The disparity between public ownership of land and the rights of citizens on landholding is misunderstood by policymakers. Research has shown for the first time the root cause for the discontent of expropriated persons in Ethiopia.

The objectives of the case study are to provide an overview of intellectual property rights and intellectual property rights in Indian context; understand the intellectual property rights implementation and challenges for implementing it in emerging economies; understand what would be the best approach that companies can adopt when the companies face backlash in such circumstances; and explore the scope for redefining the intellectual property rights in the changing global environment.

In December 2021, the Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers’ Rights Authority (PPV&FRA) in India revoked the plant variety protection (PVP) certificate granted to PepsiCo India Holding (PHI) for its Lays variety potato (FL-2027, known as FC-5). The FC-5 variety possessed low moisture content which made it suitable for making potato chips. The controversy started with Pepsi suing the small and marginal farmers of Gujarat for alleged patent infringement and cultivating the patented variety. Pepsi’s legal suit against nine marginal potato farmers in Gujarat initiated the dispute over how intellectual property (IP) rights are used to intimidate small, marginal farmers and its infringement of farmers’ rights. But, on the other side, the interesting aspect was how IP infringement could be a setback for the companies that made the capital investment to develop the variety. The case study discusses the backlash Pepsi faced due to this IP rights legal suit and the punitive aspects of IP rights (IPR) law. Moreover, in the context of the global pandemic, the case study helped discuss the need to redefine the intellectual property rights regime keeping in mind global welfare.

The case is intended for use in postgraduate-level management courses in agricultural marketing, agribusiness, international business and economics. This study can help management students understand how IPR is defined, the apparent complexities associated with it and the adverse effect of it on small and marginal farmers in emerging economies.

Teaching notes are available for educators only.

CSS 5: International business.

This paper aims to take a step in this direction and use the high dimensional fixed effects and quantile regression discontinuity design to test the managerial Coase theorem, which provides an institutional perspective for us to gauge the impact of private property rights on firm performance and the effect of management costs on intermediate inputs.

This study first uses high dimensional regression discontinuity designs to examine the impact of privatization on firm performance in China between 1998 and 2013.

Results indicate that privatization effects increase average outputs of the firm by around 10% given lower management costs, and management costs increase intermediate inputs by more than 50% points. Using data from annual surveys to test managerial Coase theorem, the authors show that management costs negatively affect the marginal effect of privatization on the average outputs of the firm. The positive impact on the investment in intermediate goods and services is larger in magnitude under higher management costs.

The authors develop the managerial Coase theorem. Today, given lower management costs, private property rights provide an incentive structure for a firm to maximize the value of the assets and expand the boundaries.

This paper aims to analyze the scholarly approach to examine the issues at the intersection of intellectual property rights (IPRs) and human rights (HRs) and ways to address, to examine broad categories of approaches used by the scholars in examining this conflict, their justification and to provide concrete directions for HRs framework of intellectual property.

The study conducted systematic literature review of 94 research articles published between 1996 and 2021, focusing on cross roads between IPRs and HRs.

The in-depth content analysis of 94 published research papers revealed the polarization of scholarly opinion on the HRs perspective of IPRs.

Very limited efforts were made in past to synthesize and organize scholarly research on the conflict between IPRs and HRs covering the right to education, to access information, to food, etc. besides the right to health care. This study synthesized and analyzed the scholarly research on the crossroad between IPRs and HRs, revealed critical conflict areas and collated the justifications of opposing approaches to provide inputs to international organizations, policymakers and governments for the enforcement of IPRs from the perspective of HRs.

This paper develops a conceptual framework that is applicable in various compensation settings vis-a-vis relevant legal frameworks, compensation processes and practices, compensation outcomes and adequacy of resultant compensation by using a common evaluative framework, to address the lack of such a conceptual framework in the compensation literature. Also, by developing a new conceptual framework, this paper provides a platform and an analytical tool for anchoring and analysing future research on compensation for expropriation of various property rights.

This conceptual paper is based on original thought and review of literature on compensation for expropriation.

A critical analysis of existing literature on compensation for expropriation of customary properties reveals that most studies are inadequately informed by relevant compensation theories and that each study uses its own tailor-made analytical framework. This entails that there is no general conceptual framework for anchoring new studies in compensation and aid in extrapolating their results to similar populations and contexts.

This paper makes novel contribution to knowledge by developing a new conceptual framework for analysing compensation for expropriation of customary property rights, which is not there currently. Essentially, by developing the new conceptual framework, this paper provides a basis for anchoring new research works in compensation and their analyses, thereby making a further contribution to knowledge.

This study aims to systematise the methodology used in comparative urban planning law and propose primary contexts for comparison in planning law.

This study undertook a review of comparative law methodology discourse and sought to establish connections between the discourse and the field of planning law.

This study argues for establishment of a realistic goal for comparative planning law by focusing on the planning law's modifiability. The goal of comparison in planning law should not be to find universally desirable principles or better solutions. Rather, the goal should be to identify a motive for devising a solution. This is because it is not only difficult to establish legal values that are universally applicable to planning law but also inappropriate to determine superiority of planning laws that have been developed over time by each jurisdiction’s sovereignty and policies on land use. When determining comparable systems for analysis among legal systems that are functionally equivalent, it is important to consider the context of land use relations alongside the comparative analysis to be done. To set realistic goals, the context should not be extended indefinitely but be systematised. Based on the foundational relationship underlying planning law, including the tension between planning authorities and property owners, this study presents five specific contexts for comparative analysis: “Strength of Property Rights,” “Level of Judicial Intervention,” “Plan- or Development-led System,” “Allocation of Planning Power” and “Level of Participation.” Examination of these contexts will allow better understanding of the similarities and differences among different systems and practical application of the results of comparative studies.

This study presents a novel approach to systematising the methodology and framework of comparative planning law.