English Property Law Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

English Property Law - Essay ExampleIntellectual keeping is also integral to property justness. One of the reasons for the promulgation of the law is the need to create distinction amongst realistic property and psycheal property (Worthington 2000 92). Of course, unmatched of the most important goals of those that promulgated the law is to ensure that the conflicts that arise on the ownership of property entrust be reduced as much as possible. One of the instances that can be used to truly certify that the English property system is more pragmatic than theoretical is the manner in which judge give judgement in faces, precisely those that pertain to property law. Instead of strictly following what the statutes say, most judges would rather rely on logic. Lockes theory of property also seems to reiterate this point. This is because Locke begins his arguments my stating that, at inception, property was personalmeaning that there were no individual owners. However, the persistenc e of this state of thing will mean that no one would be able to use land, for example, for individual or communal benefit. Locke recognizes that there is the need to create a system in which individuals can lay claim of ownership to what was hitherto communally possess (Tully 1980 34). This aspiration would be impossible if one desires to get the assent of every section of the community. It can only happen when individuals begin to exchange something in return for what they desire. At the very inception, it was their bodily sweat later, it was valuable property and finally it became capital. The presentment of money meant that the yardstick for separating the wealthy from the poor had been established. By interpretation, one could assume either of these two opinions. First, one could conclude that the flexibility, rather than the rigidity, of the English property law has really helped to limit the level in which every Tom, Dick and Harry who is a capitalistic would be able to tu rn personal property into real property. Secondly, one may conclude, on the other hand, that flexibility of the English property law (which is best established in the practical sense) has helped to materialize the desire of the capitalist to convert most of what was formerly owned communally into real property. On the whole, one would discover that Lockes property theory opts capitalism as against communalism. What Locke defends is that money can be the solution to all problems (Tully 1980 52). Even in England, this seems to be true because if anybody is rich enough to employ the services of a proficient lawyer, the case is close to being won already even before any judgment is pronounced. The lawyer would be able to also turn the odds to favour their client. The English property is very fluid in nature. Most lawyers, hence, take advantage of this. They have been able to make the English property law, which to an average person would appear as one of the most rigid laws ever, into one that has become very flexible (Worthington 2000 97). For instance, there is really no clear distinction between real and personal property again. This is because lawyers have been able to interchange them, through interpretation, to suit the demands of their case. What lawyers have been able to accomplish may not really be as a result of their ingenuity but as a result of the fact that the law itself has created the lapses. For example, normally, the English statute would recognise an estate owned by a family as