Manorial rights are certain rights which were retained by lords of the manor in England and Wales when land became freehold in the early 20th century, and can include rights to mines and some minerals, sporting rights such as hunting, shooting and fishing, and rights to hold fairs and markets. In the past such rights were not required to be detailed on theregister of title, but they remained overriding - that is they bound the owner of the affected and even though they may not have known about the rights. Changes made through the Land Registration Act 2002 sought to increase the transparency and knowledge of such rights by requiring that they be registered and removing their overriding status. This Act specified a deadline - October 2013 - by which such rights should be registered to ensure they could not be lost.

This book reveals the neglected world of the English manorial tenure of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. It is rooted in landmark legislation: the Enfranchisement of Copyholds Act of 1841, and the Law of Property Act of 1922. The latter still largely governs modern property law. The story did not end until the property of the last documented former manorial tenant was enfranchised in 1957. While the English manorial system is fundamental to understanding much medieval and early-modern history, little attention has been paid to its ability to contribute to our understanding of the modern world. This book establishes for the first time a protracted manorial property revolution in England after 1841, which lasted over 100 years. This story is a massive lacuna in the history of property, and not just in the countryside; the urban manorial tenant was also heavily present in the landscape. Property rights registration since 2002, coinciding with the shale gas fracking furore, has reawakened interest in this neglected aspect of legal history, and ensures that this book will be of interest to lawyers and historians alike.

Authoritative, analytical, and concise, McFarlane, Hopkins and Nield's Land Law provides succinct coverage on the core areas without sacrificing depth or detail. The authors' unique approach to land law arms students with the tools to apply an independent, critical thought process to the content covered in classes and assessments.

The Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) was set up in 1997, by the Criminal Appeal Act 1995, on the recommendation of the Royal Commission on Criminal Justice. The CCRC investigates alleged miscarriages of justice, post-conviction and post-appeal, and has the power to refer cases back to the Court of Appeal for reconsideration. The Committee held a one-off evidence session on the work of the CCRC in January 2014, and then sought some views on the issues raised. The Committee subsequently decided to hold an inquiry on the CCRC, and launched it with a general call for evidence. The "real possibility" test, which requires that for a referral to be made there must be a real possibility that the conviction or sentence would not be upheld on appeal, was one of the most controversial aspects of the CCRC. The Committee found that criticisms broadly fell into one of three areas: that the test itself is wrong; that the test is being applied incorrectly by the CCRC; or that the Court of Appeal's approach to criminal appeals is overly restrictive. The Committee's considers each of these areas in turn. Critics of the test felt that it inherently prevents the CCRC from being truly independent of the Court of Appeal. The Committee concludes that any change would have to be in light of a change to the Court of Appeal's grounds for allowing appeals.

This book examines treasure law and practice from the rise of the new science of archaeology in the early Victorian period to the present day. Drawing on largely-unexamined state records and other archives, the book covers several legal jurisdictions: England and Wales, Scotland, Ireland pre- and post-independence, and post-partition Northern Ireland. From the Mold gold cape (1833) to the Broighter hoard (1896), from Sutton Hoo (1939) to the Galloway hoard (2014), the law of treasure trove, and the Treasure Act 1996, are considered through the prism of notable archaeological discoveries, and from the perspectives of finders, landowners, archaeologists, museum professionals, collectors, the state, and the public. Literally and metaphorically, treasure law is revealed as a ground-breaking chapter in the history of the legal protection of cultural property and cultural heritage in Britain and Ireland.

The Justice Committee held a pre-appoointment hearing with the preferred candidate, Mr Paul McDowell. This report contains the oral evidence from that meeting and the Committee approves his appointment. The report also contains correspondence between the Chair of the Committee and the Secretary of State, the job advertisement, the person specification used in the recruitment process, and Mr McDowell's curriculum vitae.

Since the reforms came into effect, there has been a significant underspend in the civil legal aid budget because the MoJ failed to ensure that those who are eligible for legal aid are able to access it. This has been partly been due to a lack of public information, including information about the Civil Legal Advice telephone gateway for debt advice, and the Committee recommends that the MoJ take prompt steps to redress this. The Committee also concludes that the exceptional cases funding scheme has not worked as Parliament intended. It was supposed to act as a safety net, protecting access to justice for the most vulnerable. The Committee expects the MoJ to react rapidly to ensure that the scheme fulfils Parliament's intention that the most vulnerable people are able to access legal assistance. The Government's reforms have led to an increase in the number and a change in the profile of litigants in person: increasingly these are people who have no choice but to represent themselves, and who may thus have difficulty in doing so effectively: although many tribunals are accustomed to dealing with unrepresented litigants the courts have to expend more resources in order to assist them. The MoJ has not been able to demonstrate that it has achieved value for money for the taxpayer. Although significant savings have been achieved, efforts to target legal aid at those who most need it have focused on intervention aimed at the point after a crisis has already developed, rather than on prevention.