There will likely be continued meddling in the market through legislation, but adding a right to housing can't override existing protections.
There will likely be continued meddling in the market through legislation, but adding a right to housing can't override existing protections.Nonetheless, if such a referendum was successful it seems likely to result in a situation where the law of unintended consequences will almost certainly apply. And the likely losers will be property owners.
I can't see adding a right to housing as having any major consequence other than adding a stick to beat the incumbent government with when they fail to do so. A right to housing will not put an onus on private individuals or companies to provide a solution.This will open a huge can of worms. I am a landlord who is an individual not a company (seperate legal entity in Irish law). Are my property rights (on my rental property) as a individual not the same as on my home?
If it a fruitless exercise then why do it? I wish I shared your optimism regarding "not put the onus on private individuals" look at how small Landords are being treated.I can't see adding a right to housing as having any major consequence other than adding a stick to beat the incumbent government with when they fail to do so. A right to housing will not put an onus on private individuals or companies to provide a solution.
Because it's populist!If it a fruitless exercise then why do it?
It might be their aim, but that doesn't make it so. There is a right to free education, but that doesn't mean private individuals, companies, or even schools are obliged in any way to provide that service.Of course inserting a right to housing in the Constitution will limit landlord's rights over their property. Restricting the property rights set out in the constitution is an explicit goal of those campaigning for the amendment.
Yes - the important thing to understand about constitutional strikedowns around rent control was that the law was set at a time there was a demonstrable crisis, and the government could claim greater good of the public, which was constitutionally acceptable, but once the problem went away there was no longer a justifiable reason to retain those rent controls. If there was still a similar crisis in 1981, then the law would not have been stuck down.Will this remain the case after the constitutional amendment on the right to housing is passed?
Up until the claims for "your" or "your family" use - since a company is not a living entity, it doesn't live in a house so therefore cannot make a legal claim that it is "needed for family use." Similarly, a "company" has no "family" to house.This will open a huge can of worms. I am a landlord who is an individual not a company (seperate legal entity in Irish law). Are my property rights (on my rental property) as a individual not the same as on my home?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?