https://www.ros.gov.uk/performance/land-register-completion/...
Land ownership is quite a contentious issue in Scotland.
Yes, I saw an article recently that said that approx 50% of Scottish Land is owned by just 420 families. It's actually worse than England in that respect.
Respect for pre-existing rights and arrangement isn't really such a big deal and rigorously exterminating that kind of stuff doesn't seem to be a requirement or even an advantage to modernity or having an ordered society.
The article's remark about "...legal daftness..." is anachronistic and absurd.
> That in conveighing a Descent in a Writ of Right, none shall presume to declare of the Seisin of his Ancestor further, or beyond the Time of King Richard, Uncle to King Hentry, Father to the King that now is;
It then says the term "time immemorial" was actually introduced by the Prescription Act 1832 (and links to a different page than it is talking about) but that actually says:
> Whereas the expression “time immemorial, or time whereof the memory of man runneth not to the contrary,” is now by the Law of England in many cases considered to include and denote the whole period of time from the Reign of King Richard the First, whereby the title to matters that have been long enjoyed is sometimes defeated by shewing the commencement of such enjoyment, which is in many cases productive of inconvenience and injustice;
Perhaps I'm misunderstanding this since it was written almost 200 years ago, but this reads like it is describing an existing term in use in the Law of England. A term supposedly introduced at some point between 1275 and 1831 to describe the limit introduced by the Statute of Westminster 1275.
The included history is interesting, but how this date turned into the concept of "time immemorial" remains unknown.
"It is Provided, That in conveying a Descent in a Writ of Right, none shall [presume] to declare of the Seisin of his ancestor further, or beyond the time of King Richard, Uncle to King Henry [III], Father of the King that now is"
Which is to say, 1189, 86 years earlier. Other writs were limited to the voyage of King Henry III in Gascony (1230?), and others still to his coronation in 1216.
Now according to [1], other limitations were put under Henry VIII, until the act of 1832, where they made it clear that its limitations were the ones to use, and not the old standard of the reign of Richard I, from the Statute of Westminster.
[1] https://welpartners.com/blog/2019/07/time-whereof-the-memory...
A sweet remembrance of someone and a time of 120 or so years earlier.
flave•3mo ago
Much of the special status of London was granted before 1189, and it retains its special because of time immemorial concept and English common law.
I won’t bore you with all the details but there’s loads of weird stuff like a mayor that only lasts a year, companies get the vote based on number of employees, separate police for from the rest of London etc etc. That’s barely scratching the surface.
Can’t easily be changed because some of the “rights and liberties” predates written common law and are “senior”. Of course, when push comes to shove they find a way but that rarely happens.
mstade•3mo ago
I also worked (and indeed lived) in the City a few years and fell down this rabbit hole for a spell. The more you dig into this the weirder it gets, but it's quite a fun rabbit hole indeed. :o)
NoboruWataya•3mo ago
It could pretty easily be changed by an Act of Parliament, but there's no real political will to do so. It doesn't do any harm and makes for some interesting tidbits to impress tourists with.
graemep•3mo ago
That is the result of recent legislation. Until about 20 years ago companies did not get votes. Individuals got votes by being freemen of the city, usually by being members of a livery company, the descendants of medieval guilds.
> Can’t easily be changed because some of the “rights and liberties” predates written common law and are “senior”.
It can be changed by passing legislation.
I lived in the city (in the Barbican) in the early 2000s and loved it.
tomatocracy•3mo ago
What changed more recently was the allocation of which individual people get to exercise those votes - "business votes" became "workers votes".
The election of the Lord Mayor and the Sheriffs is separate though. This is still done at Common Hall (and the franchise is still Liverymen), but that election is very very rarely contested.
euroderf•3mo ago
And to go one step further, I've read the idea that Brexit was instigated to prevent The City from being regulated by Brussels. It's a theory that might fit the facts.