Understanding Different Land Tenure Systems in Australia

This article discusses the different land tenure systems in Australia including old system title, strata title, company title, and leasehold. It also explains the significance of land titles and the rights of aboriginal Australians. The article provides an overview of each system, its advantages and disadvantages, and how it works. It also covers the importance of deeds and title searches in real estate ownership matters.

Running head: PROPERTY LAW
Property Law
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author note

1PROPERTY LAW
(A)
Old System Title:
The old system title of the land tenure system was established in Victoria in March, 1838.
It was the first land tenure system that was introduced. The purpose of the old system was based
on the principles and rules of the English Common Law where the land was obtained through
settlement. As observed from the Transfer of Land Act, 97% of the land was brought under this
mentioned act. The remaining 3% was still in effect of the Victorian land. However, the old
system was treated to be expensive and time-consuming for keeping it in operation. On the other
hand, the dealings of the property were generally carried out by the deeds (Watkins, 2015).
However, the state does not register the titles under the deeds and therefore it does not certify the
title. As observed, a deed is recorded by the State and can only be used in times of counter
claims to land ownership. Under the old system title or old law, the memorial should be filed out
at the Registrar’s General office. If the chain of title deeds does not exist then, a transfer of land
cannot be undertaken. Hence, this is the reason why the process of old title is expensive. When
there is a downfall of old law, registration of a memorial is not required consisted in the
documentation of the transaction. The State however, produces no such guarantee of the parcel
of land. Thus, the term ‘root of title’ refers to the fact that with the old law titles, the probability
of an error title generally increases over time. Whereas on the other hand, the Torrens Title is
usually referred to as freehold, this is used in all the exiting states. This kind was established in
1858, is registered by the State government, and is guaranteed. In Australia, the maximum
number of properties falls under the system of Torrens Title since it covers all the residential and
commercial titles. There can be no mortgage on the property if the property belongs to the title

2PROPERTY LAW
owner who has been named as such on the title deed. This property includes other services as
well including oil and coal.
Strata Title
This particular title is also known as the group Title that can vary slightly between the
states what it should give and hint that there are some conditions on the ownership of the land.
The strata title while owning plots can be applied to both commercial and residential properties
by either grouping it under one roof or standing singly (Anderson, 2017). Among the differences,
the common factor between them is that they are all probably sited on the one title deed parcel of
land and hence they can share of you similar facilities such as Gardens and roads. Common walls
entrance hall and they can share community facilities. There are differences as well since the
owner of a property on the inside of the union but usually not the outside that is termed to be the
common property. However, it can be said that an external organ over a Windows need
permission before it can be erected. These body corporate needs to work by a connection with
the developer. They are usually conducted by an unfair cause in holding over the provisions of
services that are provided to the entire property and even after restricting the future is an
agreement.
Company Title
When it comes to the company title the ownership was originated almost a century ago but they
are still applied in present in a few areas. It can be stated that the company will remain the owner
of a complete Complex and buy right of obtaining and holding the accurate number of shares
where one can attain the rights to a particular apartment (Benson, 2016). This can be
differentiated from the start a title and the old tenure system as it does not give the opportunity of

3PROPERTY LAW
holding shares where the rights can be attained to any kind of a particular apartment. This kind of
title amongst the general public and subsequent selling of a property will need the sale of the
shares that are considered to be difficult.
Leasehold
Every method or title of owning a property is can be differentiated as all of them are
unique in their own way. The way of holding property can be utilized over the government
properties in the rural areas are referred to as the leasehold title (Sherry, 2016). In this method, it
was observed that there could be an initial cost including the annual rental, although the terms
and conditions can differ. Regarding this property, the role of the state governments is to decide
and subdivide the release the properties if the area is developing for residential development.
Advantages and disadvantages of each
 The benefit of Torrens property is that one cannot adversely possess Torrens land. Once
the land is registered as Torrens land and an individual is using that same plot of land
hostile to the interests of the owner then the owner will be kept protected from any kind
of claim of the ownership by the hostile party (Easthope & Randolph, 2018). The
disadvantage of Torrens land is regarding the mortgage where maintaining the record is
necessary.
 The advantage of strata title is the lifestyle advantage of outsourcing the bulk of the
maintenance of the property. The demerit of this property is that the fees that are
subjected for the change are likely to amplify the age of the building.
 The merit of the company title states that the company title apartments are usually not
considered expensive as compared to the strata apartments (Easthope, 2015). The

4PROPERTY LAW
disadvantage of the company title is that the owner is generally held liable for the
insurance and maintenance of the structure (Beatty & Shou, 2015).
 The benefit of the community title is that the land is divided for forming into units and
other common property that are somewhat similar to the strata title.
(B)
Canberra is known as the capital city of Australia having a population of 403,468. Canberra
adopted the system of leasehold in the Act. It has a different land title system to the rest of the
nation as the concept of leasehold tenure. In Australia, there have been three strands of land
policy. The Commandments releasing a flat to users helps in enabling the achievement of the
objectives of public through the conditions under which the leave is granted and through the
revenue that are earned from the rents. Canberra follows this system as the taxation of land
focuses on producing the revenue and discouragement owners from keeping their land Idle or
under used. The purpose of the regulation for the land use is to achieve the social and
environmental objectives to the management of land use. However, it was known as the system
of town planning (Altman & Markham, 2015). The only reasonable measure that is used in
Wonderland is owned freehold. In Canberra the freehold and empowers the landholders to
control the use of development of the land and its sale, subdivision and transfer. The purpose of
leasehold tenure is the rights of the lessee and entitlement to the use and enjoyment of the land
for the terms and conditions are laid down by the state. The committee of Australian believed
and noted that the legal tender system in the Act serves the two major interests including local
and national. The rest of the nation follows the tenure system of Torrens title, Strata title,
community title and native title. The land of Canberra is our work our national heritage that
should be safeguarded and used for the benefit of the day and its capital. Britannia of leasehold

5PROPERTY LAW
makes sure that the ownership of the land remains in the public domain so that it will be
beneficial for all the Australians (Gurran & Bramley, 2017). Therefore, the function is not
always clear and evident in the way the land use planning and lease administration have been
handled in the past. If there is no coordination between the two functions then Canberra not be
able to carry out the objectives of the leasehold tenure. The public ownership of planets and
system of please all can you have made it possible for the government as the plan for promoting
the plan by initiated the development of land and the changes that took place for controlling the
use through direct contracts with lessees. The purpose of the leaves is a significant instrument for
controlling the development of land use (Booth & Romero, 2014). The planning and
development of Canberra was successful. However, there has been widespread acceptance and
the system of tenure. The leasehold tenure was successful in providing security uncertainty in the
process of development and the planning costs in Canberra. It is comparatively lower as
compared to the other Nations. The Canberra has one of the lowest costs of development as
compared to the other municipalities of Australia. The systems of the state include fragmented
development, distortion of the Planning process by the pressures of development and community
services are avoided in Canberra. There have been difficulties with perpetual leasehold when
there is involvement of contractual problems.
(C)
In the property law, there is a title where a bundle of rights in a piece of property where can
either own a legal interest. The rights over here in the wonder can be separated and held by
different parties. This way also referred to a formal documents as a deed which acts as an
evidence of ownership (O'Neill, 2016). The property Rises legislation in all states and territories
are based on the torrents principal of registration of title. Each state and Territory has a central

6PROPERTY LAW
register of all the state that shows the owner of the land. Therefore, the land title is treated as an
official record. It consists information regarding easements, mortgages and caveats. The major
significant changes that were discussed regarding land titles are that a title is not the same as a
deed. Deeds are considered to be legal instruments that are put to use for transferring a title from
one party to another. The deed talks about the terms and conditions of the transfer consisting of
the parties involved and the parcel of land. Another process includes transferring of land
ownership rights where the clerk’s office should receive a legally identified copy of the deed.
Hence, it will act as the title of certificate that will change to reflect the alteration in the
ownership. These dates are treated as important instruments in the real estate ownership matters.
Secondly, the change talks about the property owners where we should keep the land titles in a
secured location. It has been observed detrimental and requested for a copy of the Original
certificate of title from the clerk’s office for a free, majority are transferred or shifted to keep the
land ownership documents in a safe place. However, all the owners can hold their own duplicate
stifle. Particularly is owner of land title has the ability to hold one legally valid copy of the title.
The land owners along with the co-owners should have a tenancy in common. The individuals
associated with the ownership must hold a particular percentage of the land. When it is regarding
a community property, the married individuals should share the ownership of the property
equally as a community property (Martin, 2016). Thirdly comma while dealing with the task
based ownership, the planning process of the estate includes a situation where the individuals
should set up costs as title owners for of setting the liability of the property tax. Hence, a
company has the right to legally on the title of the property instead of an individual. The deeds
after the registered should jot down each owners copy in the system of Record Keeping for
confirming the validity of each County issued copy. When it is regarding and ownership of trust

7PROPERTY LAW
or company, unidentified administrator shall hold a copy of the title on behalf of the company.
The perspective of the land owners frequently conducts the title searches to uncover the potential
issues (Sheehan, 2016). While making the title research, the investigator should go through the
land documentation that has been present for years for recognizing the potential issues with land
ownership. The title searches for revealing the information regarding the property work
agreements, issues with the documentation and ownership claims. For instance, if the past
property of the owner gives a company or property is it right then search will also reveal these
recorded covenants. The land uses the title searches during the process of buying and selling
whereas many other parties can benefit themselves from a title search. Over the years, the
explanation for the diversity in land tenure systems world frame in terms of unilineal evolution.
The recent approaches have less restrictive evolutionary trajectories (McGrath, Dinkler &
Andriolo, 2015). The studies of land tenure evolution were handicapped by the dearth of the
documented transformation. The majority of the historical documentaries changes in maintains
arose under the legal, colonial and conflict related pressures.
(4)
The aboriginal Australians have traditionally enjoyed little protection from the law. The matter
of lands has been at the heart of the aboriginal relations since the Nation was first founded. It has
been recognized recently and land rights have been provided to the Australian indigenous people.
Such a situation was observed in the case of Mabo v Queensland in the year of 1992. It is to the
principal that pastoral leases and native titleholders rights must co-exist accept that in the event
of any inconsistency the pastoralists rights were to prevail provided the activity was being
pursued. The recent legal change is the parliamentary revision of the native title act so that the
coexistence principle was put to rest mainly through formatting the state governments for

8PROPERTY LAW
upgrading the Holdings to form freehold. Therefore, immunity from the nature title clean and
reducing the payment of compensation plays the role. In this regard, it is noteworthy to mention
here that the aboriginal Australians world being denied the freedom for carrying out property
rights under the native title. It is however not enough for the aboriginal Australians to get hold of
the property rights if they do not execute to them. Presently comma the legal restrictions have
stopped the latest item and from being used as equity for raising the capital for entrepreneurial
activities. Along with this, there were exercises regulations that undermined the self
determination of poverty and the land tax bills which occurred for property that people have
never had the opportunity for the development. The husband legal instruments that are taxable in
nature so that the communities can use the title as they soffit consisting with different kinds of
ownership structures. There are new Business models for the purpose of the communities to
build economic opportunities for raising finance for the development of ownership and housing.
In the year of 1997, the aboriginal tribes were treated as a threat. The developers and mining
companies that the Federal government enacted the needed title act 1983 given Indian
indigenous individual too much power over the development. The developers and minors usually
do not want to negotiate with the indigenous individuals. It is therefore, on the field of the above
regions that the powers of consent for bargaining as to what happens on the traditional land will
block all the development (Martin, 2016). However, this view is unjustified and the argument
was based on the practice of the emergence in the Northern Territory of Australian. The aim and
objective was still and hold up to the view that just as developers in the Northern territory had
learnt to live with your body channel and rights act and developers in other parts of Australia
who should also have an idea to live with the native title act. In case of reconciliation in
Australia between indigenous and non-indigenous individuals, all the Australians must accept

9PROPERTY LAW
that the Origins should have the land rights and beast rights cannot be ignored by anyone. The
native title act dead phone enables the national native title Tribunal for negotiated agreements
between the primary Producers and the indigenous people (Anderson, 2017). Various
applications have been launched with the Tribunal to indicator willingness of operations for
asserting that both right and the native title mediation process of entering into the situation.
However, there was an objection made by the developers that discussed the fact that the origins
had wished to claim rights. It was not needed for the government to prove the attachment to the
country. It must be proved that the government had already eliminated Danny Daze title property
rights by providing a third party the power to prohibit others. The above-mentioned act, the
native individuals should be able to show that the connection was maintained with the land
accordingly along with the traditional laws. Ideally, the support for developing the necessary
proposals based on the original land. It had come from the people themselves. Discussions
should be initiated with the developers on the project of their own whether it is regarding
tourism, mining and fishing. In reality, the indigenous people contemplate the development that
are kept a position where individuals must think about the existing nature of their identity as a
biologist and the community in relation to the non-residents (Easthope & Randolph, 2018).
Therefore, it does not entitle the experiences the fact that the developers did not fear and the long
term by any kind of negotiation with the people of aborigines. The latest title act plays a
significant role for the recognition of the fact that there are operations, which are referred to the
owners of Australia who believes in the traditional rights.

10PROPERTY LAW
References:
Altman, J., & Markham, F. (2015). Burgeoning Indigenous land ownership: Diverse values and
strategic potentialities. Native title from Mabo to Akiba: A vehicle for change and
empowerment, 126-142.
Anderson, G. (2017). Future property and the Torrens system. Deakin L. Rev., 22, 1.
Beatty, A., & Shou, M. (2015). Property:'Rebuilding NSW'on private land: Who has
compensation rights?. LSJ: Law Society of NSW Journal, (13), 92.
Benson, A. (2016). Property law: NSW strata reforms: How the changes will affect you. LSJ:
Law Society of NSW Journal, (27), 84.
Booth, C., & Romero, C. (2014). Private and protected: Where to for conservation
covenanting. Wildlife Australia, 51(1), 32.
Dunn, K. M., Atie, R., Kennedy, M., Ali, J. A., O’Reilly, J., & Rogerson, L. (2016). Can you use
community policing for counter terrorism? Evidence from NSW, Australia. Police
Practice and Research, 17(3), 196-211.
Easthope, H. (2015). The Role of Retirees in Residential “Private Governments”. Journal of
Urban Affairs, 37(3), 311-326.
Easthope, H., & Randolph, B. (2018). Collective Responsibility in Strata Apartments. In Multi-
Owned Property in the Asia-Pacific Region (pp. 177-195). Palgrave Macmillan, London.

11PROPERTY LAW
Easthope, H., Warnken, J., Sherry, C., Coiacetto, E., Dredge, D., Guilding, C., ... & Reid, S.
(2014). How property title impacts urban consolidation: A life cycle examination of
multi-title developments. Urban Policy and Research, 32(3), 289-304.
Gurran, N., & Bramley, G. (2017). Housing, Property Politics and Planning in Australia.
In Urban Planning and the Housing Market (pp. 259-290). Palgrave Macmillan, London.
Martin, F. (2016). To Be, Or Not to Be, a Charity: That Is the Question for Prescribed Bodies
Corporate under the Native Title Act. Deakin L. Rev., 21, 25.
McGrath, P. F., Dinkler, L., & Andriolo, A. (2015). Managing Information in Native Title
(MINT).
O'Neill, L. (2016). The Role of State Governments in Native Title Negotiations: A Tale of Two
Cities.
Sheehan, J. (2016, February). Native Title Holders as Vulnerable Publics: Conflict between
Spatial Planning and Native Title Law in Australia. In Geography Research Forum(Vol.
29, pp. 132-140).
Sherry, C. (2016). Strata Title Property Rights: Private Governance of Multi-owned Properties.
Taylor & Francis.
Troy, L., Randolph, B., Pinnegar, S., & Easthope, H. (2015). Planning the end of the compact
city. In Proceedings of the state of Australian cities Conference 2015 (pp. 9-11).
Watkins, P. (2015). The role of title insurance in a Torrens title jurisdiction. LSJ: Law Society of
NSW Journal, (16), 84.

12PROPERTY LAW
Wiesel, I., Bullen, J., Fisher, K. R., Winkler, D., & Reynolds, A. (2017). Shared home ownership
by people with disability.