Agricultural tenancies: implied surrender and regrant and the operation of the Agricultural Tenancies Act 1995

Agricultural tenancies arising after 1st September 1995 are mostly governed by the Agricultural Tenancies Act 1995. As such, tenants under this Act do not benefit from the degree of protection conferred on tenancies already in existence, which remain under the Agricultural Holdings Act 1986. Section 4 of the 1995 Act seeks to protect those tenancies which subsequently inadvertently undergo a surrender and regrant and which would otherwise lose the protection of the 1986 Act. This paper seeks to investigate, by relating recent case law and statute to the situation of agricultural tenancies, the occasions where surrender and regrant might occur and whether in such instances the protection of the 1986 Act will be lost.

Atrocities in theory and practice: An introduction

Classical counterinsurgency theory – written before the 19th century – has generally strongly opposed atrocities, as have theoreticians writing on how to conduct insurgencies. For a variety of reasons – ranging from pragmatic to religious or humanitarian – theoreticians of both groups have particularly argued for the lenient treatment of civilians associated with the enemy camp, although there is a marked pattern of exceptions, for example, where heretics or populations of cities refusing to surrender to besieging armies are concerned. And yet atrocities – defined here as acts of violence against the unarmed (non-combatants, or wounded or imprisoned enemy soldiers), or needlessly painful and/or humiliating treatment of enemy combatants, beyond any action needed to incapacitate or disarm them – occur frequently in small wars. Examples abound where these exhortations have been ignored, both by forces engaged in an insurgency and by forces trying to put down a rebellion. Why have so many atrocities been committed in war if so many arguments have been put forward against them? This is the basic puzzle for which the individual contributions to this special issue are seeking to find tentative answers, drawing on case studies.

‘European strategists and European identity in the nuclear age’

European writers on strategy (in French: strategistes, as opposed to practitioners, stratèges) developed their thoughts on the best strategies and postures of nuclear deterrence against their own beliefs in the identities of their own countries - were they seen as "Europesn" or as "nation-states" who must under no condition surrender their sovereignty?