Rights and Duties and End Values
Britain today stands at the crossroads, rather than at a tolerant compromise. As a democracy of sorts in the 'real world' we have a mix of end-values, in authoritarianism, anarchism, altruism, and downright chaos. Fortunately we are a fairly law-abiding and socially stable country, so we can put aside the danger of outright chaos as there is elsewhere in the world. But which way we should evolve, or are evolving by default, is a moot question.
It is notable that parliamentary legislation in the different part of Britain, is often in conflict with high court decisions based on human rights. In Scotland it seems there is a conflict between the rights of landlords and tenants of land, and recent legislation. What this signifies is not that law must be brought in line with high court opinion, and existing human rights, but that law and rights [and duties] must all evolve together. Which means society must have its declared social goal, and end-value.
An extreme authoritarian state based on property, would have owners rights dominant over those of tenants. For anarchistic society property would be distributed widely, and for personal benefit - a property owning democracy of sorts. Altruistically motivated society, so far as property is concerned, would have it as a social and community asset that might be entrusted to individuals or companies - the railways? But there is no single set of rights and duties.
It might be mentioned as an aside, that we have commerce that appears to believe it has a right to expand indefinitely and bring in labour from anywhere globally, to service that expansion. If commerce were socially and environmentally responsible, from the grass roots, Britain would have population and social stability and commerce would be there to service and employ that population.