Use of Property Rights Registers for sustainability : a Queensland Case Study

Sustainable natural resource management has been a concern of governments and legislators for the last 20 years. A key aspect of an effective management framework is easy access to information about rights and obligations in land and the natural resources in, on or below the land. Information about legal interests in land is managed through a Torrens register in each Australian State. These registers are primarily focused on the registration of a narrow group of legal interests in the land, and rights or obligations that fall outside of these recognised interests are not capable of registration. Practices have developed however for the recording of property rights in natural resources either on separate registers, with no link to the Torrens register or on a separate register managed by the Registrar of Titles but having no legal effect on the title to the land. This paper will discuss and analyse the various ways in which registers have been used in Queensland to provide access to information about rights in natural resources, and provide examples as to how this approach has impacted on the desire for sustainable management. It will also provide a critique of the Queensland model, and call for reform of the present system.

When should private property rights give way to the public interest?

Since Queensland Wire Industries Pty Ltd v Broken Hill Pty Co Ltd (1989) 167 CLR 177 it has been recognised that corporations with substantial market power are subject to special responsibilities and restraints that corporations without market power are not. In NT Power Generation Pty Ltd v Power and Water Authority (2004) 219 CLR 90 McHugh A-CJ, Gummow, Callinan and Heydon JJ in their joint reasons stated (at [76]), that s 46 of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) (CCA) can operate not only to prevent firms with substantial market power from doing prohibited things, but also compel them positively to do things they do not want to do. Their Honours also stated (at [126]) that the proposition that a private property owner who declines to permit competitors to use the property is immune from s 46 is “intrinsically unsound”. However, the circumstances in which a firm with substantial power must accommodate competitors, and private property rights give way to the public interest are uncertain. The purpose of this Note is to consider recent developments in two areas of the CCA where the law requires private property rights to give way to the public interest. The first part of the Note considers two recent cases which clarify the circumstances in which s 46 of the CCA can be used to compel a firm with substantial market power to accommodate a competitor and allow the competitor to make use of private property rights in the public interest. Secondly, on 12 February 2014 the Minister for Small Business, the Hon Bruce Billson,released the Productivity Commission’s Final Report, on the National Access Regime in Pt IIIA of the CCA (National Access Regime, Inquiry Report No 66, Canberra). Pt IIIA provides for the processes by which third parties may obtain access to infrastructure owned by others in the public interest. The Report recommends that Pt IIIA be retained but makes a number of suggestions for its reform, some of which will be briefly considered.

Property rights in and entitlement to possession of sperm following death

In May 2011, the Supreme Court of New South Wales in Jocelyn Edwards; re the estate of the late Mark Edwards [2011] NSWSC 478 granted an application by a wife, in her capacity as administrator of her late husband's estate, to possession of sperm extracted from the body of her late husband.

The stewardship paradigm : an enquiry into the ethical obligation associated with being in control of resorces

The resource allocation and utilization discourse is dominated by debates about rights particularly individual property rights and ownership. This is due largely to the philosophic foundations provided by Hobbes and Locke and adopted by Bentham. In our community, though, resources come not merely with rights embedded but also obligations. The relevant laws and equitable principles which give shape to our shared rights and obligations with respect to resources take cognizance not merely of the title to the resource (the proprietary right) but the particular context in which the right is exercised. Moral philosophy regarding resource utilisation has from ancient times taken cognizance of obligations but with ascendance of modernity, the agenda of moral philosophy regarding resources, has been dominated, at least since John Locke, by a preoccupation with property rights; the ethical obligations associated with resource management have been largely ignored. The particular social context has also been ignored. Exploring this applied ethical terrain regarding resource utilisation, this thesis: (1) Revisits the justifications for modem property rights (and in that the exclusion of obligations); (2) Identifies major deficiencies in these justifications and reasons for this; (3) Traces the concept of stewardship as understood in classical Greek writing and in the New Testament, and considers its application in the Patristic period and by Medieval and reformist writers, before turning to investigate its influence on legal and equitable concepts through to the current day; 4) Discusses the nature of the stewardship obligation,maps it and offers a schematic for applying the Stewardship Paradigm to problems arising in daily life; and, (5) Discusses the way in which the Stewardship Paradigm may be applied by, and assists in resolving issues arising from within four dominant philosophic world views: (a) Rawls' social contract theory; (b) Utilitarianism as discussed by Peter Singer; (c) Christianity with particular focus on the theology of Douglas Hall; (d) Feminism particularly as expressed in the ethics of care of Carol Gilligan; and, offers some more general comments about stewardship in the context of an ethically plural community.

Property, planning and purpose : legal concerns facing broadband rollout in Australia

The Australian government, and opposition, are committed to facilitating high-speed broadband provision. In April 2009 the (then) Labor government announced a proposal to facilitate provision by mandating “…the use of fibre optic infrastructure … in greenfield estates ….” Separately, the installation of (usually overhead) cables commenced in select brownfield areas throughout Australia. In the lead up to the 2010 federal election, the broadband policy focus of the (then) federal opposition was to enabling private investment rather than direct investment by government itself. High-speed broadband is essential for Australia’s economic future. Whether implementation is undertaken by government, government owned corporations or private investors, will impact on the processes to be followed. Who does what, also will determine the rights available to land owners. The next stage, of necessity, will involve the establishment of procedures to require the retrofitting of existing urban environments. This clearly will have major property, property rights and valuation impacts. As Horan (2000) observed “…preserving... unique characteristics … of…regions requires a compromise between economic ambitions and social, cultural, and environmental values”. The uncertainty following the federal election, and the influence of independants with individual agendas; presents unique challenges for broadband implementation. This paper seeks to identify the processes to be followed by various potential broadband investors as they work to establish a ubiquitous network. It overviews current legislative regimes and examines concerns raised by stakeholders in various government reviews. It concludes by plotting a clear way forward to the future, with particular regard to property rights and usage.

A Best Practice Process for Fleet Safety Training

This paper outlines a process for fleet safety training based on research and management development programmes undertaken at the University of Huddersfield in the UK (www.hud.ac.uk/sas/trans/transnews.htm) and CARRS-Q in Australia (www.carrsq.qut.edu.au/staff/Murray.jsp) over the past 10 years.

The function of property in creating an effective legal regime for trade in environmental offsets

Market-based environmental regulation is becoming increasingly common within international and national frameworks. Environmental offset and trading regimes are part of the market-based instrument revolution. This paper proposes that environmental market mechanisms could be used to introduce an ethic of land holder responsibility. In order for market based regimes to attract sufficient levels of stakeholder engagement, participants within such scheme require an incentive to participate and furthermore need to feel a sense of security about investing in such processes. A sense of security is often associated with property based interests. This paper explores the property related issues connected with environmental offset and trading scheme initiatives. Relevant property-related considerations include land tenure considerations, public versus private management of land choices, characteristics and powers associated with property interests, theories defining property and the recognition of legal proprietal interests. The Biodiversity Banking Scheme in New South Wales is then examined as a case study followed by a critique on the role of environmental markets.

On the (partially) inalienable rights of participants in virtual communities

As virtual communities become more central to the everyday activities of connected individuals, we face increasingly pressing questions about the proper allocation of power, rights and responsibilities. This paper argues that our current legal discourse is ill-equipped to provide answers that will safeguard the legitimate interests of participants and simultaneously refrain from limiting the future innovative development of these spaces. From social networking sites like Facebook to virtual worlds like World of Warcraft and Second Life, participants who are banned from these communities stand to lose their virtual property, their connections to their friends and family, and their personal expression. Because our legal system views the proprietor’s interests as absolute private property rights, however, participants who are arbitrarily, capriciously or maliciously ejected have little recourse under law. This paper argues that, rather than assuming that a private property and freedom of contract model will provide the most desirable outcomes, a more critical approach is warranted. By rejecting the false dichotomy between ‘public’ and ‘private’ spaces, and recognising some of the absolutist and necessitarian trends in the current property debate, we may be able to craft legal rules that respect the social bonds between participants while simultaneously protecting the interests of developers.

A cybernetic approach to land management issues

This work is a digital version of a dissertation that was first submitted in partial fulfillment of the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy at the Queensland University of Technology (QUT) in March 1994. The work was concerned with problems of self-organisation and organisation ranging from local to global levels of hierarchy. It considers organisations as living entities from local to global things that a living entity – more particularly, an individual, a body corporate or a body politic - must know and do to maintain an existence – that is to remain viable – or to be sustainable. The term ‘land management’ as used in 1994 was later subsumed into a more general concept of ‘natural resource management’ and then merged with ideas about sustainable socioeconomic and sustainable ecological development. The cybernetic approach contains many cognitive elements of human observation, language and learning that combine into production processes. The approach tends to highlight instances where systems (or organisations) can fail because they have very little chance of succeeding. Thus there are logical necessities as well as technical possibilities in designing, constructing, operating and maintaining production systems that function reliably over extended periods. Chapter numbers and titles to the original thesis are as follows: 1. Land management as a problem of coping with complexity 2. Background theory in systems theory and cybernetic principles 3. Operationalisation of cybernetic principles in Beer’s Viable System Model 4. Issues in the design of viable cadastral surveying and mapping organisation 5. An analysis of the tendency for fragmentation in surveying and mapping organisation 6. Perambulating the boundaries of Sydney – a problem of social control under poor standards of literacy 7. Cybernetic principles in the process of legislation 8. Closer settlement policy and viability in agricultural production 9. Rate of return in leasing Crown lands

Alternative systems for Intellectual Property in the digital age

This paper investigates the current turbulent state of copyright in the digital age, and explores the viability of alternative compensation systems that aim to achieve the same goals with fewer negative consequences for consumers and artists. To sustain existing business models associated with creative content, increased recourse to DRM (Digital Rights Management) technologies, designed to restrict access to and usage of digital content, is well underway. Considerable technical challenges associated with DRM systems necessitate increasingly aggressive recourse to the law. A number of controversial aspects of copyright enforcement are discussed and contrasted with those inherent in levy based compensation systems. Lateral exploration of the copyright dilemma may help prevent some undesirable societal impacts, but with powerful coalitions of creative, consumer electronics and information technology industries having enormous vested interest in current models, alternative schemes are frequently treated dismissively. This paper focuses on consideration of alternative models that better suit the digital era whilst achieving a more even balance in the copyright bargain.

Regulating for Sustainability : Property Issues

All Australian governments recognize the need to ensure that land and natural resources are used sustainably. In this context, ‘resources’ includes natural resources found on land such as trees and other vegetation, fauna, soil and minerals, and cultural resources found on land such as archaeological sites and artefacts. Regulators use a wide range of techniques to promote sustainability. To achieve their objectives, they may, for example, create economic incentives through bounties, grants and subsidies, encourage the development of self-regulatory codes, or enter into agreements with landowners specifying how the land is to be managed. A common way of regulating is by making administrative orders, determinations or decisions under powers given to regulators by Acts of Parliament (statutes) or by regulations (delegated legislation). Generally the legislation provides for specified rights or duties, and authorises a regulator to make an order or decision to apply the legislative provisions to particular land or cases. For example, legislation might empower a regulator to make an order that requires the owner of a contaminated site to remediate it. When the regulator exercises the power by making an order in relation to particular land, the owner is placed under a statutory duty to remediate. When regulators exercise their statutory powers to manage the use of private land or natural or cultural resources on private land, property law issues can arise. The owner of land has a private property right that the law will enforce against anybody else who interferes with the enjoyment of the right, without legal authority to do so. The law dealing with the enforcement of private property rights forms part of private law. This report focuses on the relationship between the law of private property and the regulation of land and resources by legislation and by administrative decisions made under powers given by legislation (statutory powers).

Water rights and water governance : a cautionary tale and the case for interdisciplinary governance

Although Australia is the world’s driest continent without the complication of international borders and a generally good governance reputation, its record of water governance is very poor. This chapter considers some of the potentially general lessons that might be derived for water governance. These include: the difficulties of delineatingwater rights; the apparent preference for creating property rights in unsustainable uses of water while failing to deliver basic water rights; the inter twining of carbon and water crises; the dangers of privatising networks that form natural monopolies; the dangers of disciplinary hubris where interdisciplinary understanding is critical. It concludes by starting to address some of the water governance issues raised by globalisation.

The role of property law in environmental management

Market-based environmental regulation is becoming increasingly common within international and national frameworks. In order for market-based regimes to attract sufficient levels of stakeholder engagement, participants within such schemes require an incentive to participate and furthermore need to feel a sense of security about investing in such processes. A sense of security is associated with property-based interests. This article explores the property-related issues connected with the operation of environmental markets. Relevant property-related considerations include examining the significant role that market-based regulation is playing in connection with the environment; examining the links between property rights and markets; exploring the legal definition of property; analysing the rights and powers associated with environmental interests in land; advancing theory on the need for landholder responsibilities in relation to land and examining the legal mechanisms used to recognise environmental property rights, including the registration thereof.

Enabling sustainable property practices by ensuring security of tenure

Sustainable property practices will be essential for Australia’s future. The various levels of government offer incentives aimed at encouraging residents to participate in sustainable practices. Many of these programmes however are only accessible by owner occupiers, or landlords and tenants with long term tenancies. Improving security of tenure for tenants, to enable longer term tenancies, would positively impact upon property practices. This article explains what security of tenure is and identifies how a lack of security of tenure adversely impacts property practices. By comparison with Genevan property practices, it concludes by making suggestions as to how security of tenure can be reinforced.