Research Paper on:
Granting Licenses, Proprietary Estoppel Development, and English Law

Unformatted Sample Text from the Research Paper:
maybe undertaking an act of trespass, and may render themselves liable to pay damages. The right to enter land not owned is granted by way of a licence, but this  license is very different from propriety interests, it entitles the users to use the land as stated by the licence, but does not create any estate itself. The well known  case is that of Thomas v. Sorrell (1673) Vaughn at 351 states "A dispensation or license properly passeth no interest, nor alters or transfers property in anything, but only  makes an action lawful, which without it had been unlawful" (Gravells, 2000). A more recent case which clarifies this is that of Street v Mountford [1985] A.C. 809 Lord  Templeton stated "A licence in connection with land, while entitling the licensee to use the land for the purposes authorised by the licence does not create an estate in the  land" (Gravells, 2000). It is with a negative aspects that serves to differentiate between licences and interests that may appear similar in their content. There are different tools that can  be used to create the apparent interest, for example, residence in a property may be by way of either a lease of a licence, and a right to use a  footpath may be by way of an easement or a licence (Gravells, 2000). It is also possible for a licence to be used as a lease or and easement substitute,  and may give the holder of that licence a degree of exercisable rights over the party granting the licence (Gravells, 2000). Alternatively, there are also more general license, such as  those granted to delivery men, such as postman or milkman, or from a shopping centre to the shoppers allowed on the premises, where there is not interest granted in any