The parties had been owners of a property. The defendant was thought to have forged a transfer of the house into her sole name, and then sold on the property to her brother, who was innocent of the forgery. The claimant, on returning to England sought rectification of the register.
Held: The fact that a forgery had taken place was not conclusive to decide the issue. It was not the case that rectification should be ordered only where it would be unjust not to. The fact of possession was significant, but not so that the fact of possession was decisive either. There were two innocent parties, and one would be entitled to an indemnity. The value of the property had increased substantially since the transaction, Mr Lim was in possession of the property, and the value of the claimant’s share in the property at the time was small. Recification against the defendant was refused.
Judges:
Blackburne J
Citations:
Times 08-Jun-2005, [2005] EWHC 630 (Ch)
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Kingsalton Ltd and Another v Thames Water Developments Ltd and Others ChD 19-Jan-2001
The fact of possession of land by the registered proprietor was a factor to be given special effect when a court considered an application to rectify the register. The presumptions following from the registration of the land with title absolute, . .
Cited by:
Cited – Gold Harp Properties Ltd v Macleod and Others CA 29-Jul-2014
The company appealed against an order re-instating to the register leases which the company said it had forfeited for non-payment of rent. After the forfeiture, the landlord had granted new leases. It appealed saying that exceptional circumstances . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Registered Land
Updated: 14 September 2022; Ref: scu.226036