Right, title and interest: Difference between revisions
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{a|plainenglish|}}[[Right, title and interest]] is habitual legal [[Legal triplicate|triplicate]] meant to capture ''any'' [[type, kind or variety]] | {{a|plainenglish|}}[[Right, title and interest]] is habitual legal [[Legal triplicate|triplicate]] meant to capture a claim of ''any'' [[type, kind or variety]] that a [[legal eagle]] can think up with respect to something, however it may manifest itself. | ||
Of the three, “title” — formal legal ownership of something capable of being owned — is the narrowest and “[[interest]]” — encompassing equitable and legal claims, expectations and aspirations that might through the machinery of some judicial process benefit the claimant — is the widest so any [[prose stylist]] would therefore declaim “right” (one person’s enforceable claim against another person or thing, whether amounting to a title or not) and “title” for “[[interest]]”. | Of the three, “title” — formal legal ownership of something capable of being owned — is the narrowest and “[[interest]]” — encompassing equitable and legal claims, expectations and aspirations that might through the machinery of some judicial process benefit the claimant — is the widest so any [[prose stylist]] would therefore declaim “right” (one person’s enforceable claim against another person or thing, whether amounting to a title or not) and “title” for “[[interest]]”. | ||
Revision as of 14:20, 28 December 2020
|
Towards more picturesque speech™
|
Right, title and interest is habitual legal triplicate meant to capture a claim of any type, kind or variety that a legal eagle can think up with respect to something, however it may manifest itself.
Of the three, “title” — formal legal ownership of something capable of being owned — is the narrowest and “interest” — encompassing equitable and legal claims, expectations and aspirations that might through the machinery of some judicial process benefit the claimant — is the widest so any prose stylist would therefore declaim “right” (one person’s enforceable claim against another person or thing, whether amounting to a title or not) and “title” for “interest”.
Especially since, if you’re pedantic enough to want to include all three, you will also be pedantic enough to use each’s correct preposition, and naturally they’re different: one has a right over,[1]a title to, and an interest in, so you may find yourself granting something “free and clear of any rights, title and interest over, to and in, as they case may for the time being be ...”.
I know, right.
See also
- ↑ Yes yes: or “to”.