Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The covenant may be negative or affirmative. A negative covenant is one in which property owners are unable to perform a specific activity, such as block a scenic view. An affirmative covenant is one in which property owners must actively perform a specific activity, such as keeping the lawn tidy or paying homeowner's association dues for the ...
The sociology of law, legal sociology, or law and society is often described as a sub-discipline of sociology or an interdisciplinary approach within legal studies. [1] Some see sociology of law as belonging "necessarily" to the field of sociology, [2] but others tend to consider it a field of research caught up between the disciplines of law and sociology. [3]
Negative covenants may be continuous or incurrence-based. Violations of negative covenants are rare compared to violations of affirmative covenants. With most debt (including corporate debt, mortgages and bank loans) a covenant is included in the debt contract which states that the total amount owed becomes immediately payable on the first ...
A positive covenant is a kind of agreement relating to land, where the covenant requires positive expenditure by the person bound, in order to fulfil its terms. Unlike a restrictive covenant, a covenant to perform a positive act does not "run with the land" and therefore does not bind the covenantor’s successors in title.
Some philosophers (see criticisms) disagree that the negative–positive rights distinction is useful or valid. Under the theory of positive and negative rights, a negative right is a right not to be subjected to an action of another person or group such as a government, usually occurring in the form of abuse or coercion.
News of the Supreme Court ruling that affirmative action in higher education is unconstitutional has catapulted the policy that was legal for at least 45 years to the forefront.
Be a breach of a covenant imposed by a landlord against a tenant at the time of the original lease, which is known as having "vertical privity". In this type of privity, the covenants may be positive or negative and, unless very inequitable, are generally held to be binding.
In U.S. law, the legal concept of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing arose in the mid-19th century because contemporary legal interpretations of “the express contract language, interpreted strictly, appeared to grant unbridled discretion to one of the parties”. [1] In 1933, in the case of Kirke La Shelle Company v.