land law problem question essay

Law Notes Land Law Notes

Land Law Problem Question Framework Notes

Updated land law problem question framework notes.

Land Law notes fully updated for recent exams at Oxford and Cambridge. These notes cover all the LLB land law cases and so are perfect for anyone doing an LLB in the UK or a great supplement for those doing LLBs abroad, whether that be in Ireland, Hong Kong or Malaysia (University of London).

These were the best Land Law notes the director of Oxbridge Notes (an Oxford law graduate) could find after combing through dozens of LLB samples from outstanding law students with the highest results in ...

The following is a more accessible plain text extract of the PDF sample above, taken from our Land Law Notes . Due to the challenges of extracting text from PDFs, it will have odd formatting:

REGISTRATION/UNREGISTERED LAND

Legal v Equitable Rights

Is proprietary right legal or equitable:

Is it capable of existing as legal or equitable?

S1 LPA 1925 – rights which may be legal

Estates – fee simple (freehold) & leasehold

Interests – easements, mortgages, rights of entry contained in legal lease &rentcharge

Did it come into existence as legal or equitable right?

Legal – falls within s1 LPA 1925 + created by deed + registered in acc. w/LRA 2002

if not registered = equitable (s7 & 27(1) LRA 2002)

Equitable – a proprietary right could be equitable for one of 3 reasons :

not included in s1 (e.g. proprietary estoppel, restrictive covenant etc)

included in s1 but no deed used

included in s1 & deed used but no registration

+ created in writing OR satisfies conditions for prop. estoppel/implied trusts (CT/RT)

Effect of Legal & Equitable Rights

Unregistered land

Legal right –binding on all disponees

Equitable right

Pre-1925 - binding on disponees, except BF purchaser for value of legal estate w/out notice

Post 1925 – binding on disponees but there may be a defence

Registered land

Registered legal/equitable right in rem or overriding interest – binding on all disponees

Once electronic conveyancing system is complete, may make distinction redundant

Unregistered Land Framework

A transfers unregistered land to C = B’s pre-existing legal property right will always bind C& his pre-existing equitable right will bind C, unless C has a defence :

Scenario 1: B’s equitable right is a registrable land charge and either

B hasn’t registered it ( Midland Bank v Green – applies even against P w/actual notice, as long as s4 LCA 1972 is satisfied)); or

B has registered it against incorrect name & C has requested a search against correct one

Scenario 2: B’s equitable interests is one of the following :

Beneficial interest under trust

Proprietary estoppel

Equitable easement/restrictive covenant created pre Jan 1926 –falls outside LCA 1972

.... in which case it’s governed by doctrine of noticeC has a defence to B’s interest if he’s a BF purchaser of legal estate w/out notice (defence not resurrected on subsequent sale to P w/notice)

BF Purchaser requirements :

bona fide – acted in good faith in the purchase

purchaser of value – acquired the estate by act of parties rather than by operation of law (e.g. no adverse possession or gift)

of a Legal Estate – leasehold/freehold

w/out notice :

actual – matters of which C was aware (hearing rumours not sufficient - but will be for constructive notice)

constructive – C failed to enquire & law fixed him w/ notice (s199 LPA& Kingsnorth Finance v Tizard )

C entitled to inspect deeds up to 15 years back; if unusual docs, possibly further

P needs to discover identities of occupiers & make enquiries to them – once a person’s in possession, P has notice of all his rights, regardless of how unusual ( Hunt v Luck )

imputed – constructive notice of agent/solicitor imputed to P (if same transaction/not fraudulent)

Can’t use BF? Consider:

Did B consent out of his right by representing to C that he didn’t have an interest? ( Bristol & West Buildings v Henning )

Yes = B’s right is defeated (unless consent is vitiated see below)

Did the seller, A, contract to sell to P1 and P2 inconsistently?

Yes: P1’s estate contract has priority

Registered Land Framework

A registers property for the 1 st time Sch1 (overriding interests re 1 st registration)

A transfers registered land to C B’s pre-existing interest ( in rem ) will affect C if (ss28, 30 LRA):

entered on the register

an overriding interest - Sch 3 (unregistered interests which override registered dispositions)

Main overriding interests under Sch 3 :

Para 1 – lease not exceeding 7 years (can be registered if under 3 years voluntarily by Notice - City Permanent BS v Miller )

Para 2 – almost any right in rem of person in actual or apparent occupation at the time of disposition

“sufficiently proprietary rights” ( National Provincial Bank v Ainsworth )

obvious on reasonable inspection + express undertaking (in context of CT such as Binnions, Ashburn ) ( Lyus v Prowsa )

Actual Occupation

In occupation

Lives there but is absent @ precise moment of disposition for short/ longer spell

Not main/real home

Employee ( Lloyds Bank v Rosset ) or spouse ( Strand Securities ) is present

Not there but belongings are

Unless they’ve been there for a short time b/f disposition ( Abbey National v Cann )

Not in occupation

Mere fleeting presence (need degree of permanence + continuity) ( Abbey National Building Soc v Cann )

Tenant or guest

Children under 18 ( Hypo Mortgages Services v Robinson )

Use of right to pass & re-pass + metal staircase on the land ( Chaudhary v Yavus )

Has a no of houses & moves b/w them but happens to be there @ the time of disposition

if 1 st visit in a year = no occupation ( Stockholm Finance Ltd )

NB: Pre 2002 : actual occupation only where disponee could easily discover the occupant’s right changed by para. 2 Sch. 3 req. that occupation also be apparent; i.e. discoverable&disponee makes inquiries. If he dos & occupant doesn’t disclose where reasonably expected to, disponee isn’t bound, unless knew about it anyway.

NB: Post 2002 : actual occupation = physical occupation ( Williams and Glynn’s Bank v Boland )

Consenting Out

Person w/overriding interest or registered right consents that disponee won’t be bound

Bristol and West Buildings v Henning – unregistered land

Paddington Building Soc v Mendelson – registered land

B as holder of right in rem (e.g. via CT) goes along w/A’s steps to sell/mortgage the property, he’ll be prevented from setting up against disponee of any interest that would otherwise bind him, on the basis of being estopped from doing so. requirements:

B must represent that he won’t enforce it (apply interpretation of reasonable bystander) by:

explicit statement

implication

Buy the full version of these notes or essay plans and more in our Land Law Notes .

• Oxbridge Notes' prizewinning note marketplace has been servingstudents since 2010 with premium study materials
• Reap the benefits of joined-up learning and earn higher grades, just like our 75,000+ happy customers.

Land Law Problem Question Framework

Need instant answers our ai exam tutor is here to help..

Ask questions 🙋 Get answers 📔 It's simple 👁️👄👁️

Our AI is educated by the highest scoring students across all subjects and schools. Join hundreds of your peers today.

More Land Law Samples

• Adverse Possession Notes
• Common Intent Constructive Trusts Notes
• Concurrent And Successive Interests Notes
• Concurrent Interests Notes
• Co Ownership Acquistion Notes
• Coownership And Family Property Notes
• Co Ownership Regulation Notes Notes
• Covenants Notes
• Creation, Assignment And Registration Of Leases Notes
• Easements Notes
• Equitable Interests Overview Notes
• Estoppel Notes
• Etherton Notes
• Family Property Notes
• Freehold And Leasehold Covenants Notes
• How Do You Create An Easement Notes
• Introduction And Registration Notes
• Joint Tenancy Or Tenancy In Common Notes
• Land Adverse Possession Notes
• Land Co Ownership Notes
• Land Definitions Rights Notes
• Land Easements And Covenants Notes
• Land Formalities, Registration, Overriding Interests And Overreaching Notes
• Land Licences, Leases And Prop Estoppel Notes
• Land Registration Notes
• Leases Contract Andor Property Notes
• Leases Notes
• Licences And Leases Notes
• Licences And Proprietary Estoppel Notes
• Licenses Notes
• Mortgages Notes
• Ownership Overview Notes
• Positive Covenants Overview Notes
• Proprietary Estoppel Notes
• Reform Of Covenants Notes
• Reform Of The Law Of Easements Notes
• Registration Applications Notes
• Registration Notes
• Registration Theory Notes
• Regulating Trusts Of Land Notes
• Remedies Of The Mortgagee Notes
• Requirements For Leases Notes
• Restrictive Covenants Notes
• The Creation Of Mortgages Notes
• The Equity Of Redemption Notes
• Trusts Of Land Notes
• Ways To Get Round The Formality Requirements Notes
• What Can Be An Easement Notes
• What Is The Driver Behind Proprietary Estoppel Notes
• What Is The Driver Behind The Family Homes Cases

• Register or Log In
• 0) { document.location='/search/'+document.getElementById('quicksearch').value.trim().toLowerCase(); }">

Chapter 1 Audio podcast: Succeeding in problem and essay questions on land law

Succeeding in Problem and Essays Questions in Land Law

[Click to view transcript]

In this audio I want to talk to you about succeeding in problem and essay questions in Land law. Students are always asking me, ‘Chris what does a first-class answer look like in Land law? How do I get my 2:2 up to a 2:1, or my 2:1 up to a first?’ I want to offer some brief reflections on that here.

Firstly, problem questions and essays are two very different beasts, and the skills are quite different for each. For problem questions, a top performing student will be able to do three key things. Firstly, clearly identify the legal issues. Secondly, explain the relevant legal principles pertaining to those issues; that means identifying relevant doctrine, statutory provisions and, vitally, any case law.

And thirdly, a top performing student will be able to apply the legal principles you've just outlined to the problem question facts. And it's here, in my experience, where students often fall down, and yet this is where many of those top first-class marks can be found. Probe, push, interrogate the facts of the problem.

Why are they there? Facts are there for a reason. What is their significance? Are any facts missing? Are there any more facts that you'd want or anymore you'd want to know?

Now, in an essay question it's quite a different animal. We ask a question or ask you to critically discuss a statement because we want to hear your views, we want your argument, and there is the word: argument.

Whether it's a statement to critically discuss, or a specific question to answer, either way, avoid the major pitfall, which is what I call the ‘description trap.’ An essay is not an excuse for you to tell us everything you know on a particular topic. Think argument, introduce your essay, unpack the question, the words in the question, what is the question asking and how do you understand the question.

Tell me in your introduction how you're going to answer this question, how are you going to address it. In the main body of your essay do what you’ve said in the introduction but draw on legal authority on wider debates, academic material, cases, legislation, all to weave an argument. And of course, don't be shy to challenge the question or the statement.

If you disagree with it, tell me why. Be critical, not descriptive, and don't sit too long on the fence. Vitally, to get a top mark in an essay you need to be using secondary resource material—journal articles, law commission documents. Luckily, I flagged these up throughout the textbook to tell you the relevant sources that you should perhaps check out.

You really cannot expect to do excellently in an essay question without referring to the secondary material.

Select your Country

ESSAY SAUCE

FOR STUDENTS : ALL THE INGREDIENTS OF A GOOD ESSAY

Essay: Land law problem question

Essay details and download:.

• Subject area(s): Coursework
• Reading time: 7 minutes
• Price: Free download
• Published: 1 October 2019*
• File format: Text
• Words: 2,101 (approx)
• Number of pages: 9 (approx)

Text preview of this essay:

This page of the essay has 2,101 words. Download the full version above.

This law problem question essay explores a variety of topics in land law, including: title and ownership of land, rights in land, easements and restrictive covenants, mortgages and leases, and the transfer of land.

1a) The first thing to do is to establish what, if any, sort of trust was created upon the purchase of the property. As there is no evidence of an express trust, if one exists then it must be implied. The  Law of Property Act 1925, s. 53 (2) gives effect and enforceability to implied trusts (whether resulting or constructive) even if they are not evidence in writing. As they both contributed monies to the purchase price, in the absence of any contrary evidence, equity assumes that they both intended to gain some beneficial interest in the property. This means that a trust must exist with the both of them as trustees (as the house was conveyed to them in their joint names) and both of them as beneficiaries (as they both contributed to the purchase price).

The question then arises over whether the trust existing is resulting or constructive. Under the ruling in  Dyer v Dyer  (1788), where purchasers contribute money in unequal proportions there is the presumption of a resulting trust. Although this proposition is rebuttable, M would have to show that A and B intended something different. B would have little trouble, in the absence of other evidence, to rebut this assertion by M.

The constructive trust is aimed at the prevention of unconscionable behaviour on the part of the one of them trustees. As there was no claim or suggestion of any untoward behaviour on the part of either A or B then this would further add to the theory that the trust is a resulting one.coba bar sebabaw orba bak inba foba ba:

Where the purchase money is paid in unequal proportions, equity assumes “bargains and not gifts”, and that the contributors are tenants in common. Furthermore, in the case of  Cowcher v Cowcher  (1972) per Bagnall J, a resulting trust was presumed to arise, in the proportions to which the contributions were made. Under these authorities on the facts of this case a resulting trust would be inferred in the favour of both A and b as tenants in common, with both A and B as legal joint tenants (there can be no legal tenancy in common under the  LPA 1925, s 1(6) .

But does it matter that B borrowed the money he contributed to the purchase price from his father? Equity still treats borrowed money as a contribution which raises a presumption of a resulting trust in favour of the contributor rather than the lender. If this were not the case, banks and building societies would have a beneficial interest in millions of homes throughout Britain – this is both undesirable and impractical so equity applies this rule to avoid the problem. However, under the authority of  Gissing v Gissing  (1971), if M could show that A had helped B in his repayments to his father than the contributions may serve to increase A’s overall beneficial entitlement. B would need to be able to rebut this assertion. Under the facts presented however, we still have the situation where A and B are equitable tenants in common, with their shares being proportionate to the purchase money they advanced (namely, A has a 5/8 interest and B a 3/8 interest).

The next question arises over what happens to A’s share when he dies. Under a tenancy in common there is no right of survivorship; this means that A’s 5/8 share passes according to the terms of his will. Therefore, assuming that his will is legitimate, his share passes to M. cal1966, please do not redistribute this hypothesis. We work very hard to create this website, and we trust our visitors to respect it for the good of other students. Please, do not circulate this hypothesis elsewhere on the internet. Anybody found doing so will be permanently banned.

As no severance is possible of a joint tenancy in a legal estate under the  LPA 1925, s 36(2) , legal title also passes to M. This means that the legal title is held by B and M as a joint tenancy for the benefit of B as to a 3/8 share and M as to a 5/8 share.

But is M allowed to claim an occupation rent for B being in sole possession of the house? As tenants in common B and M hold undivided shares – while they hold a proportion of the beneficial interest in the land they have no right to a physically demarcated piece. This means that neither B nor M could point to a certain area of the property as theirs and charge a rent for the occupancy of it. Equally neither could deny the other access to the house. If B wishes to remain in sole occupancy then he may be wise to come to some formal arrangement with M to keep her from realising her right in the land (a lease of M’s share perhaps).

1b) Again, although there is no signed written evidence ( LPA 1925, s. 53 (1)(b) , thus ruling out an express trust), the fact that both A and B contributed to the purchase money of their house means that some form of trust is created. This is because equity assumes, in the absence of any contrary evidence, that people do not behave altruistically and expect some sort of return for their investment. Having ruled out an express trust under  s. 53(1)(b)  we turn to implied trusts: where the legal title is held in the name of both the contributing parties then a resulting trust is presumed to exist. (Had legal title been conveyed to A or B alone then a constructive trust may have arisen under the authorities of  Grant v Edwards  (1986) and  Gissing v Gissing , per Lord Diplock (1971).)

Having established a resulting trust in favour of A and B we now need to decide whether A and B are equitable joint tenants or equitable tenants in common. Where the parties have contributed money in equal shares towards the purchase price, under the authority in  Wilson v Wilson  (1969) there is the presumption that an equitable joint tenancy was intended to be created. Although this rule has been criticised for being too arbitrary, it still stands and remains good law.

Thus A and B are legal and equitable joint tenants (legal tenancy in common can not occur under the  LPA 1925, s. 1(6) ).coba bar sebabaw orba bak inba foba ba:

So what happens when A dies? In joint tenancy the whole interest in the land is vested in all of the joint tenants at the same time. Although they have separate rights enforceable against each other, against everyone else they are in the position of one single owner. As they have no individual share in the land it is impossible, under the authority of  Gould v Kemp  (1834), to leave an equitable joint tenancy interest in a will. Under the same authority it is also impossible to sever such an interest by will. This is because the interest disappears at the moment of death and “passes” at that moment to the other equitable joint tenants; a will only arises at the moment  after death, after the beneficial interest has been lost.

In this case therefore A’s equitable right cannot pass to M in his will as it has already been lost under the right of survivorship to B. B thus owns the whole equitable interest. But what happens to A’s legal interest? Under the  LPA, s. 36(2) , no severance of a joint tenancy of a legal estate is permissible. As there thus can be no legal tenancy in common (confirmed in the  LPA 1925, s. 1(6) ) the right of survivorship must also apply at law, meaning that B now has the whole legal title – M has no title because A had no legal or equitable title to leave in his will. Thus B has the whole legal and equitable title, creating unity of administration and beneficial enjoyment. It also means that he holds the fee simple absolute in possession and M has no claim to the title. Thus M has no grounds for claiming an occupancy rent and B can resist such a claim. cal1966, please do not redistribute this work. We work very hard to create this website, and we trust our visitors to respect it for the good of other students. Please, do not circulate this work elsewhere on the internet. Anybody found doing so will be permanently banned.

However, if my assumption of the right of survivorship applying at law is invalid and the A’s legal title does pass to M under his will, B and M would be legal joint tenants (there can be no legal tenancy in common – see above). However, as the sole beneficiary under such a trust (a bare trust), B would be able to direct the trustees to do anything he wished, under the authority in  Saunders v Vautier (1841). Thus B could even compel M to convey the legal title to him alone. In either of these scenarios, B could become the sole legal and equitable owner of the property.

1c) A and B have expressly transferred the property to them both as joint tenants in law and equity. This express agreement serves to rebut the assumption under the maxim of “equity assumes bargains and not gifts” that the contributors take title a) as tenants in common and b) with shares proportionate to the purchase money advanced by each.

The question arises whether their hazy recollection of land law is accurate enough to mean that the conveyance was valid. As was seen in the case of  Hussey v Palmer  (1972) the courts are able to go behind the express words of the parties if they need to. For a joint tenancy to be valid there must exist the four unities – possession, interest, title and time. As the conveyance occurred and transferred title into both A and B’s joint names the unities of title and time are satisfied; as long as there was no physical dividing of the land, the unity of possession is also present; the unity of interest is met by the fact that A and B hold the same interest in the extent, nature and duration of the interest. Thus A and B meet the characteristics of an equitable joint tenancy and we have already established (see above) that there can only be legal joint tenancy.

So the legal title is held jointly for them both, and no notice is paid to the monetary shares that the pair contributed. As seen above, when A dies, there exists the right of survivorship, meaning that the whole property interest (both legal and equitable) will be vested in B, as A merely drops out of the picture. There can be no severance by will (under the authority of  Gould v Kemp  (1834)) so the part of A’s will purporting to leave the property interest to M is invalid, as there is no interest to leave. This also means that M has no right to charge B and occupancy right; you cannot charge a rent for something you have no legal title to.

1d) The answer to the last part of the question would differ according to which of the pair was the older. Under the LPA 1925, s.184, where it is uncertain which of the parties survived the other, the younger is deemed to have outlived the older. Thus the younger party (in this case) takes a complete share of the property both at law and in equity (see why M cannot inherit in q. 1b, above) at the moment of the elder’s death. Upon his death (the younger’s) the property (provided there are no further joint tenants – in this case there are not) then passes to his estate, to be divided according to his will or under the rules of probate.

Thus if A was older than B he would be deemed to have died first under s. 184. As there can be no severance by will (Gould v Kemp), A’s will leaving his share to M is irrelevant as his interest would have already disappeared through the right of survivorship. Thus when B died it would be in his estate that the property would be disposed of.

Alternatively, if B was older than A his beneficial interest would disappear at the moment of death under the right of survivorship and s.184. Thus A would own the entire beneficial interest and it could then pass to M under the terms of his will.

...(download the rest of the essay above)

About this essay:

If you use part of this page in your own work, you need to provide a citation, as follows:

Essay Sauce, Land law problem question . Available from:<https://www.essaysauce.com/coursework/land-law/> [Accessed 23-04-24].

These Coursework have been submitted to us by students in order to help you with your studies.

* This essay may have been previously published on Essay.uk.com at an earlier date.

Essay Categories:

• Accounting essays
• Architecture essays
• Business essays
• Computer science essays
• Criminology essays
• Economics essays
• Education essays
• Engineering essays
• English language essays
• Environmental studies essays
• Essay examples
• Finance essays
• Geography essays
• Health essays
• History essays
• Hospitality and tourism essays
• Human rights essays
• Information technology essays
• International relations
• Leadership essays
• Linguistics essays
• Literature essays
• Management essays
• Marketing essays
• Mathematics essays
• Media essays
• Medicine essays
• Military essays
• Miscellaneous essays
• Music Essays
• Nursing essays
• Philosophy essays
• Photography and arts essays
• Politics essays
• Project management essays
• Psychology essays
• Religious studies and theology essays
• Sample essays
• Science essays
• Social work essays
• Sociology essays
• Sports essays
• Types of essay
• Zoology essays

• Free Samples
• Premium Essays
• Editing Services Editing Proofreading Rewriting
• Extra Tools Essay Topic Generator Thesis Generator Citation Generator GPA Calculator Study Guides Donate Paper
• Essay Writing Help
• About Us About Us Testimonials FAQ
• Studentshare
• Land Law Problem Situation

Land Law Problem Situation - Essay Example

• Subject: Law
• Type: Essay
• Level: Masters
• Pages: 11 (2750 words)
• Downloads: 3
• Author: jheller

Extract of sample "Land Law Problem Situation"

• Cited: 0 times
• Copy Citation Citation is copied Copy Citation Citation is copied Copy Citation Citation is copied

CHECK THESE SAMPLES OF Land Law Problem Situation

Environmental problems and role of international, european community, and domestic laws for environment protection, asylum protection - ameers situation, discrimination in the workforce problem-resolution, application of state and federal law within the reservation, problem based learning in law, pre-incorporation contracts and resolution of problems, basis of personnel and labor law, commercial law - circumstances and contentions faced by the buyers.

• TERMS & CONDITIONS
• PRIVACY POLICY
• COOKIES POLICY

Land Law Problem Question and Essay Question

Added on   2023-06-10

About This Document

   Added on  2023-06-10

End of preview

Want to access all the pages? Upload your documents or become a member.

Land Law - Assessment - Part A and B lg ...

• Contributors : About the Site

Newgeography.com

• Urban Issues
• Small Cities
• Demographics

Moscow, like other international urban areas , is decentralizing, despite considerable barriers. The expansion will lead to even more decentralization, which is likely to lead to less time "stuck in traffic" and more comfortable lifestyles. Let's hope that Russia's urban development policies, along with its plans to restore population growth, will lead to higher household incomes and much improved economic performance.

Wendell Cox is a Visiting Professor, Conservatoire National des Arts et Metiers, Paris and the author of “ War on the Dream: How Anti-Sprawl Policy Threatens the Quality of Life ”

Note 1: The 23 ward (ku) area of Tokyo is the geography of the former city of Tokyo, which was abolished in the 1940s. There is considerable confusion about the geography of Tokyo. For example, the 23 ward area is a part of the prefecture of Tokyo, which is also called the Tokyo Metropolis, which has led some analysts to think of it as the Tokyo metropolitan area (labor market area). In fact, the Tokyo metropolitan area, variously defined, includes, at a minimum the prefectures of Tokyo, Kanagawa, Chiba and Saitama with some municipalities in Gunma, Ibaraki and Tochigi. The metropolitan area contains nearly three times the population of the "Tokyo Metropolis."

Note 2: The expansion area (556 square miles or 1,440 square kilometers) has a current population of 250,000.

Note 3: Includes all residents in suburban districts with at least part of their population in the urban area.

Note 4: Urban area data not yet available.

Photo: St. Basil's Cathedral (all photos by author)

• Login to post comments
• Evolving Urban Form: Development Profiles of World Urban Areas
• Transportation

Comment viewing options

Road in city area.

The roads and ways of the city areas are very clumsy and many accidents are happening due to the short road. But you need to maintain the driving properly otherwise you may face accident. So now the government decided to expand the road which may put the positive effect on automobile sector. I think it is a helpful service for the society people. If you have a BMW car and you have faced any problem then better to repair it at BMW Repair Spring, TX for the best service.

Transit & transportation

Transit and transportation services are quite impressive in most of the urban cities; therefore people were getting better benefits from suitable transportation service. Urban cities like Moscow, Washington, New York and Tokyo; we have found high margin of transportation system that helps to build a better communication network in these cities. I hope through the help of modern transportation system we are able to bring revolutionary change in automobile industries; in this above article we have also found the same concepts to develop transportation system. Mercedes repair in Torrance

Moscow is bursting Noblesse

Moscow is bursting Noblesse at the seams. The core city covers more than 420 square miles (1,090 kilometers), and has a population of approximately 11.5 million people. With 27,300 residents per square mile (10,500 per square kilometer), Moscow is one percent more dense than the bleach anime watch city of New York, though Moscow covers 30 percent more land. The 23 ward area of Tokyo (see Note) is at least a third more dense, though Moscow's land area is at least half again as large as Tokyo. All three core areas rely

Belgravia Villas is a new

Belgravia Villas is a new and upcoming cluster housing located in the Ang Mo Kio area, nested right in the Ang Mo Kio landed area. It is within a short drive to Little India, Orchard and city area. With expected completion in mid 2016, it comprises of 118 units in total with 100 units of terrace and 18 units of Semi-D. belgravia villas

Russians seeing the light while Western elites are bickering?

What an extremely interesting analysis - well done, Wendell.

It is also extremely interesting that the Russian leadership is reasonably pragmatic about urban form, in contrast to the "planners" of the post-rational West.

An acquaintance recently sent me an article from "The New Yorker", re Moscow's traffic problems.

The article "abstract" is HERE (but access to the full article requires subscription)

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/08/02/100802fa_fact_gessen

One classic quote worth taking from it, is: "People will endure all manner of humiliation to keep driving".

I do find it odd that the "New Yorker" article author says nothing at all about the rail transit system Moscow had, on which everyone was obliged to travel, under Communism. It can't surely have vaporised into thin air?

Moscow is a classic illustration of just how outmoded rails are, and how important "automobility" is, when the auto supplants rails so rapidly than even when everybody did travel on rails up to a certain date, and the road network dates to that era, when nobody was allowed to own a car; an article written just 2 decades later does not even mention the rail transit system, other than to criticise the mayor for "failing to invest in a transit system".......!!!!!!!!

This is also a give-away of "The New Yorker's" inability to shake off the modern PC ideology on rails vs cars.

Subscribe to NG Articles

Get new posts by email:, connect with us:.

NewGeography.com is a joint venture of Joel Kotkin and Praxis Strategy Group

Featured Content

The Coming of Neo-Feudalism

Infinite Suburbia

Recent blog posts

• The Truth About Being Jewish and in College
• Feudal Future: The Impact of Third-Party Candidates in Tipping the Election Scale
• Multiple More Jobs Accessible by Automobile Than by Transit
• Large Majority of Minorities Live in Suburbs
• Feudal Future: Addressing the Housing Affordability Crisis & Protecting the Middle Class Dream
• Shift of Net Domestic Migration to Smaller MSAs and Outside CBSAs
• Feudal Future Podcast: Navigating the Global Politics That May Shape America's 2024 Elections
• YIMBY Can Populate Conference Halls (at Least)
• Feudal Future Podcast: Exploring the Impact of Catholic Schools on Underserved Communities
• Feudal Future Podcast: Exploring the Paradox of Peace and Economics in Taiwan-China Relations

Recent popular content

• Revisiting Toronto’s G20 Costs
• Engines of Opportunity
• Agressive Canadian Progressivism is Descending the Country into Crazy
• What Is a Global City?
• California Is the Homeland of Progressive Anti-Semitism
• Gavin Newsom's Futile Bid to Trump-Proof California
• "Jaw-Droppingly Shameless:" Mother Jones on California High Speed Rail Projection
• Are Chinese Ready to Rent?

More from this author

• Largest World Cities: 2014
• Largest Cities in the World: 2016
• World Urban Areas Population and Density: A 2012 Update
• Largest 1,000 Cities on Earth: World Urban Areas: 2015 Edition
• The Evolving Urban Form: Rio de Janeiro

Recommended Books

Blogroll and partner sites.

• Burgh Diaspora
• Center for Economic Research and Forecasting
• China Urban Development Blog
• Chris Bradford - Austin Contrarian
• Houston Strategies
• LA Observed
• Multiplier Effect: Levy Economics Institute
• The Rural Blog
• The Urbanophile
• Request new password
• © 2024 New Geography
• CONTRIBUTORS :
• PRIVACY POLICY
• Stay up to date: