• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Property, Planning and Environmental Law >Homes and home working: a property law perspective
【24h】

Homes and home working: a property law perspective

机译：家庭和家庭工作：物权法视角

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Purpose This purpose of this paper is to examine whether disciplines outside law demonstrate consensus on the attributes of home, whether, to the extent that there is consensus, property law supports those attributes, whether those attributes can be reconciled with working from home, and how far property law is able to address uncertainty regarding the regulation of working from home.Design/methodology/approach This paper identifies conceptions of “home” from non-law disciplines. It examines the extent to which property law in England and Wales supports or challenges those conceptions. It examines the extent to which working in homes disrupts or distorts those conceptions. It assesses the extent to which property law engages with that disruption.Findings A lack of clarity in how “home” is defined and perceived in non-law disciplines, and a tendency in those disciplines to produce static and decontextualized notions of home is reflected in inconsistent property law approaches to protection of important “home” attributes. Recognition by property law of the prevalence of home working is relatively undeveloped. An under-appreciation of “context” dominates both cross-disciplinary perceptions of home, and the support which property law provides to those perceptions.Research limitations/implications This paper focuses on conceptions of “home” drawn from disparate disciplines and seeks to find consensus in a diverse field. It concentrates on the regulation by covenants of the use of homes for non-domestic purposes in England and Wales.Practical implications Suggested alterations to property law and practice, and to the imposition and construction of covenants against business use, might better reflect the prevalence of working from home and clarify the circumstances in which homes can properly be used for work purposes.Social implications This paper identifies that in its inconsistent recognition of “home” attributes in general, and in the lack of established principles for regulating the use of homes for business purposes in particular, property law offers insufficient certainty to occupiers wishing either to work at home, or to resist doing so. It identifies that a broader cross-disciplinary investigation into the inter-relationship between living spaces and working spaces would be beneficial.Originality/value The originality of this paper lies in its examination from a property law perspective of established cross-disciplinary conceptions of home in the context of the recent growth of working in homes.
机译：目的 本文的目的是研究法外学科是否对家庭属性表现出共识，在达成共识的范围内，财产法是否支持这些属性，这些属性是否可以与在家工作相协调，以及财产法在多大程度上能够解决有关在 home.Design/methodology/approach 工作监管的不确定性 本文从非法律学科中确定了“家”的概念。它研究了英格兰和威尔士的财产法在多大程度上支持或挑战这些概念。它研究了在家工作在多大程度上破坏或扭曲了这些概念。它评估了财产法在多大程度上参与了这种破坏。研究结果 非法律学科对“家”的定义和看法不明确，这些学科倾向于产生静态的和去语境化的家的概念，这反映在财产法对重要“家”属性的保护方法不一致。财产法对在家工作的普遍性的承认相对不发达。对“背景”的低估既主导了对房屋的跨学科看法，也影响了财产法对这些看法的支持。研究的局限性/影响 本文重点关注来自不同学科的“家”概念，并试图在不同领域找到共识。它集中于英格兰和威尔士对将房屋用于非家庭目的的契约进行规范。社会影响 本文指出，由于对“住宅”属性的一般认识不一致，而且缺乏规范特别是将住宅用于商业目的的既定原则，因此，财产法对希望在家工作或拒绝在家工作的占用者提供了足够的确定性。它确定，对生活空间和工作空间之间的相互关系进行更广泛的跨学科调查将是有益的。独创性/价值 本文的独创性在于，它从物权法的角度，在最近居家办公增长的背景下，对已建立的跨学科的家居概念进行了考察。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号