Chapter 3 focuses on the numerus clausus principle and the limited property rights. It first documents that about a quarter of jurisdictions explicitly adopt this principle, while many others do so implicitly. Chapter 3 argues that this principle is generally efficient. Chapter 3 will also show that property forms such as mortgage (called hypothec in civil law) and real easement are extremely popular.

A fee simple owner has the right to exclusive possession and may choose to occupy the land. Alternatively, a fee simple owner may choose to grant another person the right of occupation. This chapter explores the main way in which an owner of land grants another a right to occupy the land, via a lease. The chapter first considers leases under the general law. The chapter then turns to consider retail lease and residential lease legislation that was enacted in all Australian jurisdictions in the latter quarter of the 20th century. These two statutory regimes provide greater clarity as to the rights and obligations of the parties and confer significant protections for lessees. Although other lease legislation has been enacted in various Australian jurisdictions, this legislation is not considered in this chapter.

The parties to retail and residential leases cannot contract out of the provisions of the legislation. However, the general law principles regarding leases continue to apply to retail and residential leases to the extent that these principles are not inconsistent with the legislation.

The Israel Jordan peace treaty is an example of the role precedent can play in international law. Although precedents are not binding, nevertheless major parts of the Israel Jordan treaty are copied verbatim from the Egypt Israel treaty. This was done for a variety of reasons. Jordan was a far smaller and weaker State than Egypt, and it was convenient for Jordan to rely on text that had been agreed upon by the stronger brother Arab State. Diplomats and international lawyers are, mostly, a conservative group and are happy to follow a beaten path. The Egypt Israel treaty had been signed fifteen years before the treaty with Jordan and had proved itself as viable. An example of this viability is the settlement of disputes clause. The clause in the Egypt Israel Treaty had an element of ambiguity, and Jordan suggested changing it. The Jordanian negotiators agreed to accept the text of the clause in the treaty with Egypt after the Israel negotiators pointed out that the clause in the treaty with Egypt had enabled the parties to successfully submit the Taba dispute to arbitration.