Use this URL to cite or link to this record in EThOS: https://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.763698
Title: Rights to property, rights to buy, and land law reform : applying Article 1 of the First Protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights
Author: Maxwell, Douglas
ISNI:       0000 0004 7652 5233
Awarding Body: University of Cambridge
Current Institution: University of Cambridge
Date of Award: 2018
Availability of Full Text:
Access from EThOS:
Full text unavailable from EThOS. Please try the link below.
Access from Institution:
Abstract:
This dissertation examines the application and effect of Article 1 of the First Protocol to the ECHR in relation to Scots land law reform. Chapter one will reflect on why existing rights to property have come to be challenged. Chapter two sets out the human rights paradigm and scrutinises what rights and whose rights are engaged. Chapter three traces the development of A1P1. Chapter four applies the human rights paradigm to contemporary reforms. Chapter five considers the broader effect A1P1 has had on domestic property law. This dissertation submits that the problem to be overcome is that, in many instances, Scots land law reform has been reduced into a simplistic struggle. A1P1 has been held up as either a citadel protecting landowners or as an ineffective and unjustified right to be ignored. At the core of this debate are competing claims between liberal individualist rights to property and socially democratic, egalitarian goals. This dissertation argues that it is important to move beyond this binary debate. This is not about finding some mysterious "red card" or eureka moment that conclusively shows compatibility or incompatibility. Instead, compatibility will be determined by following a rule-based approach that values rational decision-making and the best available evidence, as well as the importance of democratic institutions. As such, it will be illustrated how future challenges are likely to focus not on the underlying purpose of land law reform but on the macro or micro granularity of Ministerial discretion. In coming to this conclusion, it will be argued that A1P1 has a pervasive influence on the entire workings of all public bodies and, like a dye, permeates the legislative process.
Supervisor: Lees, Emma Sponsor: University of Cambridge
Qualification Name: Thesis (Ph.D.) Qualification Level: Doctoral
EThOS ID: uk.bl.ethos.763698  DOI:
Keywords: Land ; property ; land law ; land reform ; human rights ; public law ; Salvesen v Riddell ; McMaster v Scottish Ministers ; property rights ; rights to property ; scotland ; Article 1 of the First Protocol ; Peaceful enjoyment of possession ; property law ; property theory ; community rights to buy ; agricultural law ; crofting law ; rural law ; human rights act 1998 ; scotland act 1998
Share: