The Richit-Richards family of distributions and its use in forestry

Johnson's SB and the logit-logistic are four-parameter distribution models that may be obtained from the standard normal and logistic distributions by a four-parameter transformation. For relatively small data sets, such as diameter at breast height measurements obtained from typical sample plots, distribution models with four or less parameters have been found to be empirically adequate. However, in situations in which the distributions are complex, for example in mixed stands or when the stand has been thinned or when working with aggregated data, then distribution models with more shape parameters may prove to be necessary. By replacing the symmetric standard logistic distribution of the logit-logistic with a one-parameter “standard Richards” distribution and transforming by a five-parameter Richards function, we obtain a new six-parameter distribution model, the “Richit-Richards”. The Richit-Richards includes the “logit-Richards”, the “Richit-logistic”, and the logit-logistic as submodels. Maximum likelihood estimation is used to fit the model, and some problems in the maximum likelihood estimation of bounding parameters are discussed. An empirical case study of the Richit-Richards and its submodels is conducted on pooled diameter at breast height data from 107 sample plots of Chinese fir (Cunninghamia lanceolata (Lamb.) Hook.). It is found that the new models provide significantly better fits than the four-parameter logit-logistic for large data sets.

Joint ownership and beneficial entitlement: Stack v Dowden.

Explores the issue of the share of beneficial entitlement to the family home where the legal title is jointly owned, but where there has not been an express declaration of a beneficial joint tenancy. Discusses the House of Lords judgment in Stack v Dowden which addressed this point. Explains how the judges moved the focus away from the court imposing its own sense of fairness on the parties or imputing an intention based on the circumstances to one where the concentration will be on the parties' relevant conduct. Outlines three other points of interest referred to in the judgment: (1) whether an indirect financial contribution could support a constructive trust; (2) whether proprietary estoppel and common intention constructive trusts should be assimilated; and (3) whether a mortgage liability is equivalent to a financial contribution.

Resulting trusts, joint borrowers and beneficial share

Reviews case law illustrating the courts' approach to beneficial ownership of property purchased in joint name by means of a joint mortgage but without any declaration of beneficial interest, the resulting trust and joint beneficial interest presumptions. Contrast the approach adopted in cases where one party made no contribution to the mortgage payments with those where both parties made a contribution. Highlights the courts' treatment of the right to buy discount afforded tenant purchasers and property purchased as a commercial venture rather than a home.

Insolvency: ordering a sale of the family home

Comments on the Chancery Division ruling in Nicholls v Lan on whether the interests of a bankrupt husband's creditors prevailed over those of the wife, despite her circumstances being exceptional within the meaning of the Insolvency Act 1986 s.335A on account of her suffering from chronic schizophrenia, where the wife was the joint owner of another property which could be realised to buy out the trustee in bankruptcy's half share in the equity of the matrimonial home.

A just claim?

Discusses the law relating to the payment of occupation rent to a co-owner by the party remaining in the property after a relationship breakdown both under the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 and where the Act is not applicable. Considers, with reference to the Chancery Division decision in Re Barcham, whether a trustee in bankruptcy acting on behalf of the non-occupying person can claim an occupation rent under the court's equitable jurisdiction.

On treating the symptoms and not the cause: reflections on the Dangerous Dogs Act

The experience of saving a dog that later turned out to be a Pit Bull and therefore banned under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991, made me investigate the Act and its implications. The Act is not built on evidence and by compiling results from different studies on dog bites and breed‐specific legislation in different countries the conclusion is that there is not much empirical support for breed bans either. ‘Dangerous breeds’ do not bite more frequently than German Shepherds and directing legislation towards certain breeds deemed as ‘dangerous’ cannot therefore be seen as justified. The strength of the label ‘dangerous dog’ seems to rule out policies that follow the facts and there is more treating of symptoms than causes. [From the Author]