Court of Federal Claims. The legislature may also delegate the power to private entities like public utilities or railroads, and even to individuals. Supreme Court has consistently deferred to the right of states to make their own determinations of "public use".
Utah Transfer of Public Lands Act - Wikipedia
In Canada, expropriation is governed by federal or provincial statutes. Under these statutory regimes, public authorities have the right to acquire private property for public purposes, so long as the acquisition is approved by the appropriate government body. Once a property is taken, an owner is entitled to "be made whole" by compensation for: Owners can advance claims for compensation above that initially provided by the expropriating authority by bringing a claim before the court or an administrative body appointed by the governing legislation.
- More from Livemint.
- Utah Transfer of Public Lands Act.
- Room For One More: Bisexual Tales of Menage and Beyond;
In many European nations, the European Convention on Human Rights provides protection from an appropriation of private property by the state. Article 8 of the Convention provides that "Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home, and his correspondence" and prohibits interference with this right by the state, unless the interference is in accordance with law and necessary in the interests of national security , public safety, economic well-being of the country, prevention of disorder or crime, protection of health or morals, or protection of the rights and freedoms of others.
This right is expanded by Article 1 of the First Protocol to the Convention, which states that "Every natural person or legal person is entitled to the peaceful enjoyment of his possessions. Settled case-law of ECHR provides that just compensation has to be paid in cases of expropriation. After his victory in , William the Conqueror seized virtually all land in England. Although he maintained absolute power over the land, he granted fiefs to landholders who served as stewards, paying fees and providing military services.
Chapter 28 of Magna Carta required that immediate cash payment be made for expropriations. As the king's power was broken down in the ensuing centuries, tenants were regarded as holding ownership rights rather than merely possessory rights over their land. In , a statute was passed granting commissioners of sewers in Lincolnshire the power to take land without compensation. After the early 16th century, however, Parliamentary takings of land for roads, bridges, etc. However, as the voting franchise was expanded to include more non-landowners, the bonus was eliminated. In England and Wales , and other jurisdictions that follow the principles of English law , the related term compulsory purchase is used.
The landowner is compensated with a price agreed or stipulated by an appropriate person. Where agreement on price cannot be achieved, the value of the taken land is determined by the Upper Tribunal. The operative law is a patchwork of statutes and case law. The Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany states in its Article 14 3 that "an expropriation is only allowed for the public good"  and just compensation must be made. It also provides for the right to have the amount of the compensation checked by a court. The law regulating expropriation is the D.
Also other national and regional laws may apply, not always giving a full compensation to the owner. The article 42 of the Italian Constitution and the article of the Italian Civil Code state that a private good can be expropriated for public utility. Furthermore, the article 2 of the Constitution binds Italian citizens to respect their mandatory duties of political, economical and social solidarity. The implementation of the eminent domain follows two principles: Nazionalizzazione "nationalization" , instead, is provided for by article 43 of the Constitution; it transfers to governmental authority and property a whole industrial sector, if it is deemed to be a natural or de facto monopoly , and an essential service of public utility.
The most famous nationalization in Italy was the nationalization of the electrical power sector. The right of state or municipality to buy property when it is determined to be of "particular public interest", is regulated in Expropriationslagen The law also states that the property owner shall not suffer economic harm because of the expropriation.
In Australia, section 51 xxxi of the Australian Constitution permits the Commonwealth Parliament to make laws with respect to "the acquisition of property on just terms from any State or person for any purpose in respect of which the Parliament has power to make laws. It may be necessary to imply a need for compensation in the interests of justice, lest the law be invalidated.
Property subject to resumption is not restricted to real estate as authority from the Federal Court has extended the states' power to resume property to any form of physical property. The Commonwealth must also derive some benefit from the property acquired, that is, the Commonwealth can "only legislate for the acquisition of Property for particular purposes".
The section 43 1 of the Lands Acquisition Act NT grants the Minister the power to acquire land 'for any purpose whatever'. Kirby J in dissent, along with a number of commentators, viewed this as a missed opportunity to comment on the exceptional nature of powers of resumption exercised in the absence of a public purpose limitation. The term resumption is a reflection of the fact that, as a matter of Australian law, all land was originally owned by the Crown before it was sold, leased or granted  and that, through the act of compulsory acquisition, the Crown is "resuming" possession.
Brazil's expropriation laws are governed by the Presidential Decree No. The expropriated party may protest the legality of the expropriation action before the ordinary courts of justice and shall, at all times, have the right to indemnification for patrimonial harm actually caused, to be fixed by mutual agreement or by a sentence pronounced by said courts in accordance with the law. In Panama, the government must pay a fair amount of money to the owner of the property to be expropriated.
The Constitution originally provided for the right to property under Articles 19 and Article 19 guaranteed to all citizens the right to 'acquire, hold and dispose of property'. Article 31 provided that "No person shall be deprived of his property save by authority of law.
Five years on, has land acquisition act fulfilled its aim?
In addition, both the state government as well as the union federal government were empowered to enact laws for the "acquisition or requisition of property" Schedule VII, Entry 42, List III. It is this provision that has been interpreted as being the source of the state's 'eminent domain' powers. The provisions relating to the right to property were changed a number of times. The 44th amendment act of deleted the right to property from the list of Fundamental Rights.
The aggrieved person shall have no right to move the court under Article Thus, the right to property is no longer a fundamental right, though it is still a constitutional right. If the government appears to have acted unfairly, the action can be challenged in a court of law by citizens. Under the Land Acquisition Act, , the government has the power to compulsorily acquire private land at the prevailing market rate for public purposes such as roads, highways, railways, dams, airports, etc.
Many countries recognize eminent domain to a much lesser extent than the English-speaking world or do not recognize it at all. Japan , for instance, has very weak eminent domain powers, as evidenced by the high-profile opposition to the expansion of Narita International Airport , and the disproportionately large amounts of financial inducement given to residents on sites slated for redevelopment in return for their agreement to leave, one well-known recent case being that of Roppongi Hills.
There are other countries such as the People's Republic of China that practice eminent domain whenever it is convenient to make space for new communities and government structures. Singapore practices eminent domain under the Land Acquisitions Act, which allows it to carry out its Selective En bloc Redevelopment Scheme for urban renewal.
The Amendments to the Land Titles Act allowed property to be purchased for purposes of urban renewal against an owner sharing a collective title if the majority of the other owners wish to sell and the minority did not. Thus, eminent domain often invokes concerns of majoritarianism. In the Bahamas, the Acquisition of Land Act operates to permit the acquisition of land where it is deemed likely to be required for a public purpose. The land can be acquired by private agreement or compulsory purchase s7 of the Act.
Under section 24 of the Acquisition of Land Act, the purchaser may purchase the interest of the mortgagee of any land acquired under the Act. Since the s, the Zimbabwean government under Robert Mugabe has seized a great deal of land and homes of mainly white farmers in the course of the land reform movement in Zimbabwe. The government argued that such land reform was necessary to redistribute the land to Zimbabweans dispossessed of their lands during colonialism — these farmers were never compensated for this seizure.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Eminent domain in the United States. Compulsory purchase in England and Wales. Section 51 xxxi of the Australian Constitution. This will alert our moderators to take action. Get instant notifications from Economic Times Allow Not now You can switch off notifications anytime using browser settings. Company Corporate Trends Deals. Defence Defence National International Industry.
International Business World News. NIFTY 50 10, Drag according to your convenience. Five years after the law was cleared, land acquisition remains a thorn for the government and private entities. Related Land should be bought, not acquired: The Making of the Land Acquisition Law, by Jairam Ramesh and Muhammad Ali Khan It is not often that the government enacts a law to discourage the very process the legislation aims to streamline.
It deals with a controversial and highly emotive issue that has huge political implications and replaces a colonial-era law of Industry, however, has expressed concerns over LARR going too far on the other side on these provisions. Mega projects — which are required to power the economy and create jobs — often get stuck at the land acquisition stage. Land ownership in vast parts of India are fragmented and disorganised, making direct acquisition a challenge for a private entity.
Besides, land-losers might end up with an unfair deal. LARR was conceived to take care of such issues, and help power the economy. But five years after the law was cleared, land acquisition remains a thorn for the government and private entities. This raises the question, has LARR fulfilled its aim? The department of land resources is under the rural development ministry.
LARR came into effect on January 1, Among the key features where LARR differs from the law are compensation, consent, social impact assessment SIA and rehabilitation and resettlement. LARR mandates compensation up to twice the market value in rural areas, but keeps it at market value in urban areas, like in the act. This means landowners get up to four times the market value in villages and twice the market value in cities.
But government projects do need not consent. Narendra Singh Tomar, minister for rural development, was not available for comment. SIA, for which there was no provision in the act, and rehabilitation, which was not a must earlier, were also made mandatory under LARR. But SIA, which weighs the cost of a project against its benefits, was waived for some projects.
The Making of the Land Acquisition Law. Rehab Options As part of rehabilitation, those affected can choose from three options: In December , months after taking charge, the Narendra Modi government brought in an ordinance to bring these laws within the ambit of LARR. The real reason, according to experts, was to dilute the law.
The ordinance exempted five categories of projects — including rural infrastructure and affordable housing — from clauses relating to consent, SIA and the one that says acquired land not used for five years has to be returned to the original owners or occupants. The ordinance caused a backlash from the opposition and activists. In August , the government said it would let the ordinance lapse. Later, the Union government said it would allow states to amend LARR, in effect allowing states to remove or change the clauses.
While land is a state subject, land acquisition is on the concurrent list.