The Castle Question
Recently someone posed this question to me and I believe it is a good “analogy” for some of the issues that we frequently discuss in relation to Taiwan history and legal matters. I would like to delve into the legal side of things in a bit more detail.
SCENARIO: Suppose there are three families in England, we will call them Quenton, Jubstron, and Chelton.
The Quentons and Cheltons are quite closely related through various marriages, business associations, social organizations, etc. To them, the Jubstrons are outsiders.
OK, lets begin several hundred years ago. The Quentons have a large castle in the English countryside, and it has been in their family for countless generations.
About 115 years ago, a large legal problem developed with the Jubstrons, and in order to take care of the complicated financial issues involved, the Quentons (reluctantly) gave over all rights to their castle to the Jubstrons.
That was a formal transaction, and legal owership of the castle was formally transferred to the Jubstrons. Many persons in the Quenton family were quite unhappy about this, however there was little that they could do to rectify the situation at that time (approx. the year 1895).
The Jubstrons owned the castle for about fifty-seven years. At about the fifty-year mark, they were no longer able to maintain it, and the Cheltons moved in. This was considered by all the neighbors and other interested parties to be a temporary situation.
At the fifty seven year mark, the Jubstrons had a big meeting and decided that they would complete the legal procedures to formally renounce all right, title, and claim to the castle.
Although no buyer could be found, their lawyer was still able to file the appropriate paperwork to this situation. There were many witnesses to this transaction, and they all made formal statements at the time.
Remember that this all happened in England.
My questions are as follows:
(1) Upon this type of event, with the renunciation by the Jubstrons, what happens to the “ownership” of the castle? (I personally have several theories about this, but I would like to hear some other persons’ analysis.)
(2) Is there a Department/Agency in the British government which would now be in charge of this castle? What Department/Agency is that?
(3) Or, can the Cheltons now claim full legal ownership of the castle, by asserting that it is abandonned property, and they already live there? Or are the Cheltons just squatters? and should be forcibly evacuated by the appropriate British police authority?
(4) Or, does the ownership of the castle just revert to the Quentons? (There are many members of the Quenton family who would prefer this outcome.) After all, no “receiving party” (or “beneficiary”) was named in the Jubstrons’ renunciation documents.
(5) and if the ownership of the castle reverts to the Quentons, but their family has dispersed, can the Cheltons then formally claim ownership based on some “successor family” theory?
(6) Or, is it possible that the renunciation paperwork filed by Jubstrons will be later formally rejected by the British government, and that, legally speaking, the castle still belongs to the Jubstrons?
(7) Other comments on this scenario??