Real Estate Administrative
Resume:
Expanding the Legal/Administrative Package
of the Cadastral Domain Model from Grey to Yellow?
Jaap ZEVENBERGEN, the Netherlands
Key words: cadastre, modeling, legal aspects, land rights
SUMMARY
In version 3.0 of the cadastral domain model (Lemmen et al, 2003) we did not elaborate the
legal/administrative package very much. We treated the class RightOrRestriction as an
association class between Person and RealEstateObject, both of which are unpacked by
making them abstract classes with specialization classes in their respective packages.
In this paper some first ideas on how to expand the legal/administrative side of the model are
presented. Firstly this is done through no longer treating the class RightOrRestriction as an
association class, but putting it in between Person and RealEstateObject. Secondly more
attention is given to rights and restrictions that have no direct relation to a person, but where
the prime beneficiaries are one or more other RealEstateObjects or are not clearly
identifiable. Thirdly RightOrRestriction is made into an abstract class with specialization
classes within its package. Attention is paid to the questoin whether derived rights have to be
registered as restrictions to one person or as rights to another person. Fourthly a third R (of
Responsibilities) is added. Finally it is suggested that certain specializations of
RightOrRestriction always coincide with certain specializations of RealEstateObject, and that
another way of packaging (only showing such a combination) would be very useful. More
work on, and actual UML modeling of, these first ideas will follow soon.
Jaap Zevenbergen 1/1
Expanding the Legal/Administrative Package of the Cadastral Domain Model from Grey to Yellow?
Joint FIG Commission 7 and COST Action G9 Workshop on Standardization in the Cadastral Domain
Bamberg, Germany, 9 and 10 December 2004
Expanding the Legal/Administrative Package
of the Cadastral Domain Model from Grey to Yellow?
Jaap ZEVENBERGEN, the Netherlands
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Current model
The core of the cadastral domain model as presented in figure 1 of (Lemmen et al, 2003) is a
formalized representation of the often used figure relating the three classes to each other
(like (Zevenbergen, 2004) where owner, right (title) and parcel are connected, but
several variations have been used before). The core model consists of the classes Person,
RightOrRestriction and RealEstateObject, whereby RightOrRestriction forms an association
class of the relation between Person and RealEstateObject.
In version 3.0 of the cadastral domain model (Lemmen et al, 2003) we did not elaborate the
legal/administrative package very much. Whereas the classes Person and RealEstateObject
are both unpacked by making them abstract classes with specialization classes in their
respective packages, the legal/administrative package only contains three refinements of
RightOrRestriction. Firstly the mortgage was made into its own class, that is primarily related
to a right or restriction (and through that only indirectly to a real estate object). Secondly a
class PublicRestriction was introduced related directly to the real estate object. In both cases
no relation is made to the class Person. Finally all three classes just mentioned were related to
LegalDocument (like contracts, deeds or decisions), which in virtually all cases are the source
of the establishment or transfer of a right or restriction.
In this paper some first ideas on how to expand the legal/administrative side of the model are
presented. But before we can do that, we should rethink the roots of the parcel (and the
other specializations of RealEstateObject).
1.2 The parcel
Unlike most other geographical objects that constitute what we call geo-information these
days, the parcel is not a physical reality (man-made or not), but an institutional creation. A
parcel is a part of the continuum of the earth, that a group of people have decided to treat as
an identifiable unit. To a certain extent this can be reflected by the use that is made of it, but
ultimately it is the legal rights that certain people have that determines the extent of and the
boundaries between two parcels.
This also means that the expansion of the core cadastral model in the RealEstateObject
package (see paragraph 2.1 of Lemmen et al, 2003) can only be explained by looking at
different types of legal rights that relate to different units of the earth (and even other
objects). The fact that the RealEstateObject is only an abstract class and different forms of
Jaap Zevenbergen 2/2
Expanding the Legal/Administrative Package of the Cadastral Domain Model from Grey to Yellow?
Joint FIG Commission 7 and COST Action G9 Workshop on Standardization in the Cadastral Domain
Bamberg, Germany, 9 and 10 December 2004
parcel form classes on their own is caused to a large extent by the variety in legal rights and
the variety in the types of units their vesting creates.
2. CORE OF THE CADASTRAL DOMAIN MODEL
Based on the above, it is clear that a parcel (or other object) cannot exist on its own, but
ultimately finds its definition in the extent of the unit over which a certain person holds a
legal right. RightOrRestriction cannot be depicted merely as an association class of the
relation between Person and RealEstateObject. In the field of cadastre and land registration,
at which the core cadastral model primarily aims, a parcel is totally depending on the legal
right (the type of right, the occurrence of the right and the extent of the right). Therefore
RightOrRestriction should be seen as a class on its own.
This will also make it easier to deal with the case of rights or restrictions that do not have a
direct relation to a person. Now that RightOrRestriction is no longer considered as an
association class between Person and RealEstateObject, it would be possible to allow for the
occurrence of cases where there is no relation to Person, although introducing a new
specialization class ImpliedPerson of the abstract class Person might be a more elegant
solution. In any case, this allows for making Mortgage and PublicRestriction into
specialization classes of the abstract class RightOrRestriction.
On the other hand in many countries there are certain rights which prime beneficiaries are
one or more other RealEstateObjects. This could be simple servitudes, but also party walls
(supporting two constructions owned by different persons) and other joint facilities (ranging
from common roads, fishing waters to golf courses). Such a right (or the share in the right) is
attached to the ownership of (or other strong right in) a certain, neighboring parcel, and can in
most cases not be transferred separately from that parcel. An exception to that rule can be
found for instance in Sweden with regard to the right to fish in certain water, which can be
detached from any parcel in the area. Hence the specialization NonGeoRealEstate.
3. SPECIALIZATIONS OF RIGHTS
3.1 Types of rights and restrictions
In (Lemmen et al, 2003) we emphasized that use is made of Literate Modeling, which is
very prominently done in section 2.4 with regard to the legal/administrative classes. Even
though little is depicted in the class diagram in addition to the class RightOrRestriction, we
described four categories of private law rights and restrictions. There is also a difference in
the way the different categories of rights and restrictions relate to persons, and the relevant
list of attributes is also likely to differ between the different categories. All of this form good
reason to expand the legal/administrative package, by making RightOrRestriction into an
abstract class and introducing a number of specialization classes along the lines of the
categories just mentioned.
The types of legal rights that can be distinguished contain at least:
Jaap Zevenbergen 3/3
Expanding the Legal/Administrative Package of the Cadastral Domain Model from Grey to Yellow?
Joint FIG Commission 7 and COST Action G9 Workshop on Standardization in the Cadastral Domain
Bamberg, Germany, 9 and 10 December 2004
a. Firstly we have the strongest right available in a jurisdiction, called e.g. ownership,
freehold or property.
b. Secondly we have derived rights from the previous category where the holder of this
derived right is allowed to use the land in its totality (often within the limits of a certain
land use type, e.g. housing or animal farming).
c. Thirdly we have minor rights that allow the holder of it to some minor use of someone
else his land, e.g. walking over it to the road. Such rights can be called servitude or
easement, and also may include the right to prevent certain activities or construction at
some nearby land, e.g. freedom of view.
d. Fourthly we have the so-called security rights, whereby certain of the previously
mentioned rights can be used as collateral, mainly through bank loans, in the form of
e.g. mortgage, hypothec, lien (paragraph 2.4 of Lemmen et al, 2003).
In addition to the rights listed under c) we have the party walls and other joint facilities (for
instance the Dutch mandeligheid; also see paragraph 2).
Another type can be restrictions and responsibilities whose beneficiary is less concrete, like
for instance a more or less general interest, or a type of servitude that is benefiting for
instance a utility company (to let you refrain from undertaking activities that might harm
cables or pipelines).
Of course we could expand the core cadastral model by showing these four categories of
legal rights as specialization classes of the abstract class RightOrRestriction. We might even
try to refine the model a bit more, since not all the legal rights can exist on their own. Usually
the strongest right (a.) has to apply to a parcel before rights of categories b., c. or d. can be
created. The types b., c. and d. can be depicted as composite associations of the type a.
3.2 Rights minus restrictions
Such derived rights carve something away from the strongest right. This also means that it is
not enough to know that a certain person possesses the strongest right. To really know the
extent of his right, you also need to know if any of the other rights exist there. The actual
legal right a certain person has in an object comprises of his positive rights minus other
persons positive rights with regard to the same object (or a part thereof). The question than
remains whether
a) the other persons positive right is registered;
b) the negative right of the first person is registered; or
c) both are registered
A further complication are the responsibilities, negative rights that do not have an (easy)
identifiable beneficiary.
The perception on the difference between the strongest right and the derived rights differs
between legal traditions. Most continental European countries start with ownership and
built derived rights on top of this. Much English literature, however, talks about the bundle of
sticks that make up the right(s) in land. The sticks can be freely arranged. This will also affect
the decision regarding registration of negative side of a right, which is very important in the
first case, and not so important in the second.
Jaap Zevenbergen 4/4
Expanding the Legal/Administrative Package of the Cadastral Domain Model from Grey to Yellow?
Joint FIG Commission 7 and COST Action G9 Workshop on Standardization in the Cadastral Domain
Bamberg, Germany, 9 and 10 December 2004
An interesting way of dealing with the dilemma of positive right minus a negative right is the
way the Dutch administrative cadastral database deals with this. When you have the full right
of ownership this is registered with the code VE (full ownership in Dutch). Now if someone
else gets the right of superficies (right to own a building on someone else s land) not only
will that right be added to the registration as OP, but the VE will be changed into right of
ownership minus superficies, depicted by flipping the letters of the first right and adding the
second right: EVOP. There will be no-one for this object that has a VE recorded, but only an
OP and the EVOP. This is only done with the limited rights that imply full use (leasehold,
superficies and usufruct), but not with minor restrictions like servitudes in the Dutch
implementation.
4. RESPONSIBILITIES
The class for the legal relations shown in the core model used in (Lemmen et al, 2003) is
RightOrRestriction. However, current literature on cadastral and land administration isues is
often talking about three R s: Rights, Restrictions and Responsibilities. A restriction means
that you have to allow someone to do something or that you have to refrain from doing
something yourself. Restrictions can both be within private law, especially in the form of
servitudes, as within public law, through zoning and other planning restrictions as well as
environmental limitations.
Responsibilities mean that one has to actively do something. Not all legal systems allow such
mandated activities as property rights (rights in rem), and this will also effect the question if
they can (and have to be) registered. Obviously their impact can be substantial and their
registration makes sense. Of course it is very important that it is very clear which person is
responsible for undertaking the mandated activity. If several persons hold some of the sticks
from the bundle of rights, it will not suffice to link the responsibility to the real estate object,
but it has to be linked to a specific stick, to be able to identify the responsible person.
Clearly in a system with a dominant base right, the holder of that base right is the prime
addressee of the responsibility. We should make the responsibilities into a class that is in a
composite association with other rights, and not relate it directly to RealEstateObject.
5. ANOTHER WAY OF PACKAGING
Now that the definition of parcel (and other objects) is derived from the legal rights that
persons have in them, there is a relation between the specializations of RealEstateObject and
of RightOrRestriction. If we would model all of them with extensive packages showing a lot
of specializations (like figure 2 of Lemmens et al, 2003 for the RealEstateObject package), a
model of two (actually three) abstract classes would be shown, each with a whole array of
specializations. However, these two sets of specializations are interdependent. Certain rights
can only be associated with certain objects, and certain limited rights can not be loaded
upon all other types of rights. The question than becomes, what is the use of showing this in
the way this would be shown if we expand the legal/administrative side and thus expand the
whole core cadastral model. This becomes a hard to read model, which can only be correctly
interpreted when an array of constraints is applied (this could be formalized through object
constraint languages, but also be verbally given as part of literate modeling ). An example of
this complication can be seen in the 2003 Greek draft model (Arvanitis et al, 2003) which
needs a lot of explanation to be correctly interpreted (the revised 2004 Greek model
Jaap Zevenbergen 5/5
Expanding the Legal/Administrative Package of the Cadastral Domain Model from Grey to Yellow?
Joint FIG Commission 7 and COST Action G9 Workshop on Standardization in the Cadastral Domain
Bamberg, Germany, 9 and 10 December 2004
(Arvanitis/Sismanidis, 2004) does not contain specializations for the class
RightOrRestriction, and is more like the 2003 core model).
What we would need is a way to expand from the simple three class core model, not into
packages which are based on the disciplinary aspects systems (Zevenbergen, 2002, p. 89-90),
but that we would make different models for different types of rights, with only those
specialization classes shown for RealEstateObject and for RightOrRestriction for which
common instances can be found. This type of packaging seems to be better for using the
model as a teaching or comparison tool, and is likely to enhance the spatial awareness of
different types of rights for people not used to think that way (like lawyers).
6. FINAL REMARKS
This paper showed some first ideas on how to expand the legal/administrative package of the
cadastral domain model. There clearly is room for further work and discussion on what ideas
to implement and which ones to leave out. Some indications of at least two main legal
traditions with regard to dealing with the derived rights as a right and/or a restriction have
been given, which might lead to two cadastral domain models. Finally these ideas should be
implemented through actually modeling them in UML. This will also facilitate the
understanding of the discussion for much of the audience.
REFERENCES
Arvanitis et al, 2003; Apostolos Arvanitis, Anastasia Tzani, and Eleni Hamilou - A Draft
Model for the Greek Cadastre (class diagram), presented at the COST G9 Meeting, Sopron
(Hungary), 16-18 October 2003
Arvanitis/Sismanidis 2004; Apostolos Arvanitis and Aris Sismanidis - Model of Greek
Cadastre (Revised according to the new E-R HEMCO Model), presented at the COST G9
Meeting, Riga (Latvia), 14-16 October 2004
Lemmen et al, 2003; Christiaan Lemmen, Paul van der Molen, Peter van Oosterom, Hendrik
Ploeger, Wilko Quak, Jantien Stoter, and Jaap Zevenbergen - A modular standard for the
Cadastral Domain, in: Proceedings 3rd International Symposium on Digital Earth, Brno,
Sept. 21-25, 2003, p. 399-419
Zevenbergen 2002; Jaap Zevenbergen - Systems of Land Registration - Aspects and Effects,
Publications on Geodesy 51 (ISBN 90 6132 277 4), Delft: NCG, Netherlands Geodetic
Commission, 2002
Zevenbergen 2004; Jaap Zevenbergen - A Systems Approach to Land Registration and
Cadastre, Nordic Journal of Surveying and Real Estate Research 1 (2004), p. 11-24
Jaap Zevenbergen 6/6
Expanding the Legal/Administrative Package of the Cadastral Domain Model from Grey to Yellow?
Joint FIG Commission 7 and COST Action G9 Workshop on Standardization in the Cadastral Domain
Bamberg, Germany, 9 and 10 December 2004
BIOGRAPHICAL NOTES
Dr. Jaap Zevenbergen is associate professor at Delft University of Technology, OTB
Research Institute for Housing, Urban and Mobility Studies (the Netherlands), and has
Master s degrees both in land surveying (geodetic engineering) and law. He has been
studying cadastral systems for many years, both as a researcher (it was the topic of his PhD
thesis and it is the topic of the European COST Action G9 Modelling Real Property
Transactions of which he is vice-chairman) and as a consultant (he has been involved in
drafting relevant legislation in several countries). He also lectures the relevant courses in
Delft and contributes as guest lecturer to parts of programs elsewhere.
CONTACTS
Dr. Jaap Zevenbergen
Delft University of Technology
OTB Research Institute for Housing, Urban and Mobility Studies
Jaffalaan 9
2628 BX Delft
THE NETHERLANDS
Tel. +31-15-278****
Fax +31-15-278****
Email: *.***********@***.*******.**
Web site: http://www.otb.tudelft.nl/
Jaap Zevenbergen 7/7
Expanding the Legal/Administrative Package of the Cadastral Domain Model from Grey to Yellow?
Joint FIG Commission 7 and COST Action G9 Workshop on Standardization in the Cadastral Domain
Bamberg, Germany, 9 and 10 December 2004
Contact this candidate