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.

Beneficial ownership and detriment

Considers the factors which contribute to a court finding that a cohabitee has a beneficial interest in property, in particular the detriment which is required to establish a constructive trust, with reference to the Chancery Division decision in Levi v Levi and previous case law. Outlines the provisions on express or inferred common intention. Considers whether a loan of money from the non-owning to the owning cohabitant, made at a lower level than commercial loans, towards the purchase the property was sufficient detriment to entitle her to proceeds of sale from the property.

When deterrence works - and when it doesn't: a comparison of Sweden's prostitution law and UK's Dangerous Dogs Act

Many pieces of legislation have been implemented with the anticipation - or justification - that they will have a deterrent effect. Deterrence was clearly argued in the debate preceding the Swedish prostitution law prohibiting the purchase of sexual services, but less so regarding the Dangerous Dogs Act, which was a very rapid response to a particular moral panic. As it turned out, the Swedish law has had a deterrent effect on street prostitution in that 'respectable' buyers were deterred. It will be argued that it is this very 'respectability' that makes deterrence work in this case. Regarding the Dangerous Dogs Act, the owners of Pit Bulls and other banned breeds are not considered 'respectable' and the banning might have had the reversed effect - increasing the attraction of these dogs, rather than deterring the ownership. Apart from deterrence and its consequences, the rendering invisible of key actors - buyers and owners respectively - and the use of symbolic legislation to promote moral messages will also be considered. [From the Author]

The effect of ownership structure, country governance, and financial development on the capital structure of unlisted eastern European firms

This paper investigates the determinants of capital structure for a sample of 20,713 unlisted firms from 11 eastern European countries over the period 1994-2004. We employ usual firm-specific financial variables as well as country-specific variables that describe the degrees of governance structure and financial development of each country. Using regression analysis, our results indicate that firm ownership concentration and country governance structure are insignificant explanatory variables to the degree of leverage of the firms in our sample. On the other hand, indicators of country financial development are robust determinants of capital structure. However, the marginal explanatory power of country-specific variables is small. We conclude that firm-specific characteristics are decisive in capital structure.