Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: annalex
If the owner owns the land for farming, industrial or recreational use, characteristic of real estate ownership in the West, his use of the property will be disrupted by the arrival of oil drilling equipment and such. Thus the common law develops the concept of the real estate as a cone extending from the center of the earth through the boundary and into the outer space, which implies the ownership of the mineral deposits underneath.

Not sure if the disruption of the owner's surface activity forms the main basis for his claim to subsurface wealth, but interesting.

When violations of the cone occur in a way that does not disrupt the established use of the land, the common law quickly relaxes the rules of tresspass. Since an airplane at cruising altitude does not interfere with any land use, air travel across property lines does not constitute a tresspass; and conversely, one cannot claim celestial objects by choosing a moment in time when they pass through one's real estate cone and are not claimed by an equally enterpising neighbor.

Elegantly put, that last bit.

If oil is discovered under an Arab dwelling, then, of course, in equity the dweller claims the oil regardless of his technological abilities. Unable to exploit the find, he may be willing to sell his oil rights, but that is a different story.

Seems normal enough.

A typical for the Middle East scenario is that oil is discovered in the desert. While a royalty, or a government of the country may have a technical claim on the desert, there is no natural law provision for such claim, because the oil exploration in the desert will not disrupt any activity there.

I don't know that much about natural law theory, but I seem to remember that citizens delegate certain natural rights to legitimate governments in return for more effective protection of same. Within that fully developed and properly limited delegation, I can imagine that governments might limit land ownership to citizens.

56 posted on 10/14/2001 9:16:46 PM PDT by secretagent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies ]


To: secretagent
I can imagine that governments might limit land ownership to citizens.

That I can't imagine. Among the natural rights that an indivudual has is the right to exchange his property at will. If he wishes to exchange property with a non-citizen, the govenrment's job is to assist in the transaction, not to ban it.

58 posted on 10/15/2001 11:03:44 AM PDT by annalex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson