7) Other ancillary property rights of displaced persons who return (Servitude) Returning refugees and IDPs seek to reclaim their properties along with the rights attached to those properties at the time of displacement. In some cases, they find that persons who did not have servitude at the time of displacement are asserting new rights over their properties. The applicable laws are: Roman Dutch Law and Tésawalamai. Rights of way, use of well and watercourse are common servitude. They can be acquired, inter alia, by prescription and be extinguished by non-user. An intention to abandon the servitude must, however, be proved and there is no fixed period of time in relation to which servitude can be extinguished by operation of law. Displacement of persons from possession of their lands, therefore, will not seriously affect their access to servitude, since no intention to abandon servitude could be established. If servitude is claimed to have been created over the property of a person who has been displaced, upon his return, the claimant should demonstrate that servitude is needed to continue to enjoy full property rights. Since it is anticipated that the frequency of these issues will be high, swift resolution is necessary. It is, therefore, not desirable to leave such issues for determination by courts. We recommend that issues of disputed servitude be resolved by an arbitration mechanism. 8) Property subject to mortgage or any other encumbrance Those who have obtained loans by mortgaging immovable property before or immediately after the conflict period have invariably defaulted in the payment of instalments. The main causes of defaults are either that mortgagors were displaced or rendered homeless or they did not have sufficient financial capacity to pay the instalments when demanded by the lending institution or the individual who had granted the loan. When refugees or displaced persons return to their homes, it may continue to be impossible for them to settle debts. In some cases, the accumulated interest and capital due to long delay in settlement of the debt exceeds the total market value of the property. Under these circumstances the owner/mortgagor of the property may lose the use and occupation of his house or property. The issues that arise will differ according to the nature of the encumbrance. We deal with types of encumbrance that are widely prevalent in the areas under consideration: i) Otti Mortgage The applicable laws are: Tésawalamai; and Mortgage Act No.11 of 1953 This type of mortgage is peculiar to Tésawalamai. It involves a mortgagor, having received consideration, tendering his property as security for the mortgage. In contrast to other mortgages where the possession of the property rests with the mortgagor, possession of the property in an Otti mortgage rests with the mortgagee: in essence, therefore, a usufructuary mortgage of lands. Since the mortgagor has given effective possession to the mortgagee, he does not pay interest for the advance he received. In lieu of interest, the mortgagee enjoys the produce and profits from the land until the mortgage is redeemed. Therefore, the mortgagor is not able to redeem the mortgage at his wish at any time (unlike in the other mortgages where redemption is possible at any time) and the mortgagor has to wait until the mortgagee 14