british empire took over the most land in history.
british empire took over the most land in history.
who took over the most land in history?
british empire
the most contentious method of acquiring property, albeit one that has played a huge role in the history of english land, is adverse possession. historically, if someone possessed land for long enough, it was thought that this in itself justified acquisition of a good title. this meant that while english land was continually conquered, pillaged, and stolen by various factions, lords or barons throughout the middle ages, those who could show they possessed land long enough would not have their title questioned. a more modern function has been that land which is disused or neglected by an owner may be converted into another's property if continual use is made. squatting in england has been a way for land to be efficiently used, particularly in periods of economic decline. before the land registration act 2002, if a person had possessed land for 12 years, then at common law, the previous owner's right of action to eject the "adverse possessor" would expire. the common legal justification was that under the limitation act 1980, just like a cause of action in contract or tort had to be used within a time limit, so did an action to recover land. this promoted the finality of litigation and the certainty of claims. time would start running when someone took exclusive possession of land, or part of it, and intended to possess it adversely to the interests of the current owner. provided the common law requirements of "possession" that was "adverse" were fulfilled, after 12 years, the owner would cease to be able to assert a claim. however, in the lra 2002 adverse possession of registered land became much harder. the rules for unregistered land remained as before. but under the lra 2002 schedule 6, paragraphs 1 to 5, after 10 years the adverse possessor was entitled to apply to the registrar to become the new registered owner. the registrar would then contact the registered title holder and notify them of the application. if no proceedings were launched for two years to eject the adverse possessor, only then would the registrar transfer title. before, a land owner could simply lose title without being aware of it or notified. this was the rule because it indicated the owner had never paid sufficient attention to how the land was in fact being used, and therefore the former owner did not deserve to keep it. before 2002, time was seen to cure everything. the rule's function was to ensure land was used efficiently. the darker side, was that this idea was also very convenient for an age when land was often taken by force, and when doctrines like "terra nullius" were espoused by imperialists as justifications for colonisation in british empire.
english land law
the jewish national fund is a private organization established in 1901 to buy and develop land in the land of israel for jewish settlement; land purchases were funded by donations from world jewry exclusively for that purpose. the jnf currently owns 13% of the land in israel, while 79.5% is owned by the government (this land is leased on a non-discriminatory basis) and the rest, around 6.5%, is evenly divided between private arab and jewish owners. thus, the israel land administration (ila) administers 93.5% of the land in israel (government press office, israel, 22 may 1997). a significant portion of jnf lands were originally properties left behind by palestinian "absentees" and as a result the legitimacy of some jnf land ownership has been a matter of dispute. the jnf purchased these lands from the state of israel between 1949 and 1953, after the state took control of them according to the absentee properties law. while the jnf charter specifies the land is for the use of the jewish people, land has been leased to bedouin herders. nevertheless, jnf land policy has been criticized as discrimination. when the israel land administration leased jnf land to arabs, it took control of the land in question and compensated the jnf with an equivalent amount of land in areas not designated for development (generally in the galilee and the negev), thus ensuring that the total amount of land owned by the jnf remains the same. this was a complicated and controversial mechanism, and in 2004 use of it was suspended. after supreme court discussions and a directive by the attorney general instructing the ila to lease jnf land to arabs and jews alike, in september 2007 the jnf suggested reinstating the land-exchange mechanism.
israeli jews