A father had granted an option over land to his son, but it had not been registered. The father later tried to frustrate the option by conveying the land to his wife for 500 pounds. The land was worth 40,000 pounds. When the son found out about it, he sought to exercise the option, and … Continue reading Midland Bank Trust Co Ltd v Green (No 1): HL 11 Dec 1980
The defendants had charged a property to the claimant bank to secure a guarantee of borrowings. The signatures were not witnessed as required under section 1(3) of the 1989 Act, and there were other misdescriptions. The bank sought a declaration as to the validity of the charge, and now applied for summary judgment. Held: Applying … Continue reading Bank of Scotland Plc v Waugh and Others: ChD 21 Jul 2014
Wife in Occupation had Overriding Interest The wife had made a substantial financial contribution to the purchase price of the house which was registered only in her husband’s name, and charged to the bank. The bank sought possession. The wife resisted saying that she had an overriding interest. Held: Her equitable interest was not only … Continue reading Williams and Glyn’s Bank Ltd v Boland: HL 19 Jun 1980
The Chief Land Registrar appealed against the dismissal of his appeal against the adjudicator’s decision on the cancellation of a unilateral notice. On the day of the adjudication, the Silkstones had purported to withdraw their case, wanting to take it forward instead in the High Court. The adjudicator had proceeded in any event, ordering the … Continue reading The Chief Land Registrar v Silkstone and Others: CA 14 Jul 2011
LAND REGISTRATION – ADVERSE POSSESSION – successive periods of adverse possession – transmission of title – section 75 of the Land Registration Act 1925 – significance of fencing and of grazing . .
A caution gives a right to be notified of an application, but does not give any priority on registration. . .
LRA Rectification of the register – Fraud – ‘Correcting a mistake’ – second charge – Schedule 4 Paragraph 5(1)(a) of the Land Registration Act 2002
Ms Ajibade was the registered proprietor of a leasehold . .
The second defendant had, under the undue influence of the first defendant sold him her house at an undervalue. She also asserted non est factum. He then charged it to the claimant. The court was asked which innocent party should prevail. She said . .
There is no appeal from the Registrar’s decision which has been made within the range of an administrative discretion, without the leave of the court. . .
The defendant had made a mistake resulting in an equitable chargee not being given proper opportunity to object to the registration of a further charge with priority. The chargee sought compensation from the defendant registrar.
Held: The . .
Cautions had been registered against land to protect interests claimed in a pending action. The action had been struck out at first instance, an appeal to the Court of Appeal had failed but a petition for leave to appeal to the House of Lords was . .
In an area of compulsory first registration, unregistered land was bought but no application made to register the title within two months. The purchaser then contracted for its sale.
Held: In a contract for the sale of land, the vendor agrees . .
The tenant sought an injunction against its neighbour and landlord to prevent it letting an adjoining property without a restriction similar to the one in its own lease. The claimants sought reassurance from the defendant tenants of the adjoining . .
The agricultural landlord sold part of his land subject to the respondent’s tenancy to the appellant. Before the transfer was registered, notices to quit were served by both the landlord and his buyer. The tenant challenged both notices in the . .
1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts
LRA Land Registration Act 1925, s 75 – Human Rights Act 1998, ss. 2,3 – Limitation Act 1980, s 17 – Article I, First Protocol, Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms – Adjudicator . .
Land Registration Act 1925 section 75 – Limitation Act 1980 section 15 and Sch 1 Para 8(4) – Adverse possession – Agreement – Lease or Licence – Whether consent given by paper owner – Whether squatter had intention to possess – Adverse possession . .
The purpose and effect of section 70(1)(g) of the Land Registration Act 1925 was to make applicable to registered land the same rule as previously had been held to apply to unregistered land. (Russell LJ, Dissenting) ‘Nor should the mind be in any . .
Brightman J  Ch 499 Land Registration Act 1925 70(1)(g) England and Wales Citing: Approved – Re Birmingham, deceased; Savage v Stannard 1957 An unpaid vendor’s lien arises the moment the contract is entered into. It is discharged on completion to the extent that the purchase money is paid. . . Cited by: Cited – … Continue reading London and Cheshire Insurance Co Ltd v Laplagrene Property Co Ltd: ChD 1971
LRA General boundaries – Filed Plan – Construction of pre-registration conveyance- Boundary agreement – Adverse possession – Land Registration Act 1925 section 75 – Land Registration Act 2002 Schedule 6  EWLandRA 2012 – 1130 Bailii Land Registration Act 1925 75, Land Registration Act 2002 England and Wales Registered Land Updated: 30 December 2021; Ref: … Continue reading Haigh and Another v Sturman (Boundary Dispute : Interpretation of Words of Conveyance): LRA 25 Nov 2013
An overriding interest, namely an estate contract, was protected under s. 70(1) of the Act even though it could have been protected by a caution under s. 59. Harman J  Ch 475 Land Registration Act 1925 70(1)(g) England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Ferrishurst Ltd v Wallcite Ltd CA 30-Nov-1998 A person in … Continue reading Bridges v Mees: ChD 1957
Land once conveyed for the purposes of becoming a highway, became dedicated for that purpose even though no steps were ever taken for its use for that purpose. The registration of a company as proprietor by the Land Registry did not displace the dedication since the interest was an over-riding one under the Act.The dispute … Continue reading Secretary of State for the Environment Transport and the Regions v Baylis (Gloucester) Ltd; Bennett Construction (UK) Ltd v Baylis (Gloucester) Ltd: ChD 16 May 2000
The claimant was the original tenant under two 99 year underleases granted in 1967, and assigned them to the defendant who then himself assigned them. The eventual assignee had become insolvent. The landlord recovered the rents from the claimant who now sought an indemnity from the defendant under the 1925 Act. To minimise the losses, … Continue reading Scottish and Newcastle Plc v Raguz: CA 6 Mar 2007
To defeat a defence of adverse possession, the plaintiff must succeed in an action which itself had been commenced within the twelve year period. A squatter does not succeed to the title that he has disturbed: by sufficiently long adverse possession he obtains a title of his own, but ‘his possession only defeats the rights … Continue reading St Marylebone Property Co Ltd v Fairweather: HL 16 Apr 1962
Land had been divided into three lots on its development, but the site plan did not match the line of a fence actually erected. Held: The court was not bound by the Watcham case, and would not follow it to allow reference to the later behaviour of parties in interpreting a deed. The court related … Continue reading Beale v Harvey: CA 28 Nov 2003
The claimant sought rectification of the land register. In a development deal, an option agreement had not been registered, and the land sold on. The land was required to allow the building of a roundabout necessary for the intended store. An application had been made for registration of the option, but requisitions had not been … Continue reading Sainsbury’s Supermarkets Ltd v Olympia Homes Limited, Hughes etc: ChD 17 Jun 2005
Leases had been granted. They had been assigned to the defendant who had assigned them again. The last assignee became insolvent and statutory demands were served on the claimant under the 1995 Act for rent. The claimant paid the sums due and now sought them from the defendant. He countered that his obligation under the … Continue reading Scottish and Newcastle Plc v Raguz: CA 24 Jul 2003
The court was asked whether the court has, following the the 2002 Act, an inherent power to order the cancellation of a unilateral notice registered against a title registered under the 2002 Act and, if so, in what circumstances, and how, such a power should be exercised. Held: It did have that power. The power … Continue reading Nugent v Nugent: ChD 20 Dec 2013
LRA Alteration of the register to correct a mistake – Schedule 4 paragraph 5 of he Land Registration Act 1925 – mistake made on first registration in 1971 – omission of land from title – nature of right to seek correction of register – whether right passes to purchaser under section 63 of the Law … Continue reading Rossetti Ltd v Thresher Wines Acquisitions Ltd, First Quench Retailing Limited, Whitbread (UK) Limited: LRA 8 Sep 2009
A block of flats had been occupied over several years by a succession of squatters. The present occupiers appealed an order for possession, and the authority appealed refusal of possession for other flats. The occupiers asserted possessory title. Held: The earlier occupiers had sought licences from the authority, and had submitted petitions. The letters and … Continue reading Mayor and Burgesses of London Borough of Lambeth v George Bigden and Others: CA 1 Dec 2000
An equitable easement (a right of way), which was not protected by any entry on the register, was a right openly exercised and enjoyed as appurtenant, in this case to a garage, and it adversely affected registered land as an overriding interest. The court generally considered the availability of a remedy for infringement of a … Continue reading Celsteel Ltd v Alton House Holdings Ltd: ChD 1985
The house had been bought during the marriage but in the husband’s sole name. The plaintiff’s charge secured the husband’s overdraft. The bank issued possession proceedings. Mr Rosset had left, but Mrs Rosset claimed, as against the bank an interest in it as the matrimonial home. She said there had been a common understanding or … Continue reading Lloyds Bank plc v Rosset: HL 29 Mar 1990
The lease had been assigned by the claimant to the defendant and on again to a tenant who became insolvent. The landlord had recovered sums said to be due from the claimant who now sought an indemnity from the defendant. The defendant said that the claimant had overpaid, including sums excused by section 17 of … Continue reading Scottish and Newcastle Plc v Raguz: HL 29 Oct 2008
The registered proprietor of land argued that he had become owner of a larger plot of land after a transfer plan showed regular boundaries but the markings on the ground showed irregular ones: ‘as we are concerned with a general filed map or plan, the sole question for us is whether, notwithstanding the transfer and … Continue reading Lee v Barrey: CA 1957
Admissibility . .
The claimants had been the registered proprietors of land, they lost it through the adverse possession of former tenants holding over. They claimed that the law had dispossessed them of their lawful rights.
Held: The cumulative effect of the . .
A charge executed before a purchase was ‘fed’ by a subsequent purchase and had priority. ‘Feeding the estoppel’ doctrine may apply to charges on registered land. The estoppel was fed by a later purchase without a clear recital of the title in the . .
The defendant had taken assignments of the term of two underleases from the claimant, and then re-assigned them to a limited company with guarantors of the rent, and they in turn re-assigned the leases. The last company became insolvent. The . .
The plaintiffs had paid deposits for apartments which were to be built. After the developer became insolvent the plaintiffs sought recovery of the deposits, saying they had a lien which preceded the claims of chargees.
Held: The one appeal . .
The claimants asserted that they had the benefit of restrictive covenants under a building scheme to prevent the defendants erecting more houses in their neighbouring garden. The defendants pointed to alleged breaches of the same scheme by the . .
A person in actual occupation of registered land at time of transfer can enforce his rights against the transferee. A sub-underlessee in occupation of part could enforce an option to purchase against the freeholder acquiring intermediate registered . .
The defendants had purchased their property from the local authority with the support of a loan from the claimants. The defendants fell into arrears but now sought to resist possession on the basis that the claimant, in securitising their portfolio . .
Appeal by prospective purchaser of property from order that contract rescinded, and deposit forfeited. . .
The court refused parents leave to appeal against a mortgage possession order, rejecting their argument that children living with them had a beneficial interest in the mortgaged premises and were thus ‘in actual occupation’ so as to have overriding . .
The court refused parents leave to appeal against a mortgage possession order, rejecting their argument that children living with them had a beneficial interest in the mortgaged premises and were thus ‘in actual occupation’ so as to have overriding . .
The respondent mortgagee had obtained an order for possession against the mortgagor freeholder, referred to in the judgment as ‘the Chief’, who had, prior to the mortgage, granted a tenancy to the appellant.
Held: The landlord’s retention of a . .
Mrs Moss inherited the former matrimonial home. Her daughter (L) suggested that she transfer it into their joint names to ease its transfer on her mother’s death. It was agreed the house would never be sold during Mrs Moss’s lifetime. L borrowed . .
The paper owner sought possession of land. The defendant said he had acquired a possessory title. The land was registered.
Held: The claimant’s human rights under article 1 were engaged. To be justifiable, the interference in that right had to . .
The court was asked as to the protection given by the 1925 Act to a purchaser, defined as one taking in good faith for valuable consideration.
Held: A purchaser ‘cannot in my judgment be in good faith if he has in fact notice of something . .
Tenants of a block of flats sought enfranchisement. The landlord said the notices were defective in that the office copies supplied did not show the entitlement of the persons giving notice at the relevant time.
Held: The scheme for collective . .
The claimants appealed an order finding that the defendant had acquired their land by adverse possession. They said that the defendant had asserted in defence to possession proceedings that they were tenants, and that this contradicted an intent to . .
The parties each had a charge over a property, and now disputed which had priority. The brewery appealed an order for rectification of the registers to reverse priority on the basis of an estoppel. The charge in their favour had been registered . .
The claimant alleged the fraudulent transfer of properties by use of a forged power of attorney.
Held: The power was fraudulent. Solicitors had acted under the instructions of the agent. The court referred to the Law Society’s practice . .
The claimant had previously assigned its interest in a lease to the defendant, who had in turn re-assigned it. The eventual tenant became insolvent, and the landlord had recovered sums from the claimant who now sought an indemnity under the covenant . .
The claimants had sought entry into theirs and their neighbour’s registered land titles of entries to acknowledge their rights of way. The neighbours appealed the finding of a right of way of necessity and by proprietary estoppel, and an order for . .
The lessors sued the original lessees for rent due under the lease after the term had been assigned to another. The lessors had given a licence to assign and the licence contained a guarantee from a third party to the lessors that the assignee would . .
Issues – rectification of a transfer made in 1992 – whether there was a mutual mistake as at the date of the transfer – whether the equity of rectification bound subsequent purchasers – whether the previous purchasers were in ‘actual occupation’ . .
The defendant had registered a caution against the claimant’s land at the Land Registry. The claimant sought its removal and now appealed an order for rectification of the register against him. The parties had reached oral agreements as to the . .
Mr Sharp was the local land registrar with statutory duty to maintain the local registry, issuing certificates in response to search requests. A clerk who had been seconded by another Council to assist him negligently issued an inaccurate . .
A couple bought a property and registered it in their own names with substantial financial assistance from the parents of one of them. The parents occupied the house with them. Without telling the parents, the owners borrowed again, executing . .
The first defendant appealed the award of interest on an order for specific performance of a contract for the sale of land. It had declined to complete the purchase because the seller had not been registered as proprietor of the land, and the . .
The applicant said that its land had been misappropriated, and sought rectification of the register against the respondent who was a successor in title having bought the land from the wrongdoer.
Held: On registration, section 69 operated to . .
Land was purchased and a resale negotiated before it was registered. An undertaking was accepted that the seller’s solicitor would discharge all charges. The purchasers sought to avoid completion by saying the Act required them to be registered . .
Rectification of register. . .
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, . .
Where a squatter had acquired adverse possession rights against lessee, but had not yet applied for registration, a surrender of the registered leasehold did not defeat his claim but operated as acquisition of lessee’s rights.
The court was . .
Occupation of property taken up ‘until works paid for’ was sufficiently certain to create a tenancy, despite the absence of a certain term. It would be clear when it was to come to an end. Accordingly the tenant had locus as against the mortgagee in . .
The solicitor employers of a solicitor who had acted under powers of attorney in transactions between the attorney and the principal which later proved fraudulent were negligent. The Land Registry was liable for the balance of damage suffered. Mance . .
The court considered a defence to an assertion of adverse possession, that the plaintiff had given notice of his intention to recover the land: ‘no one, either lawyer or non-lawyer, would think that a householder ceases to be in possession of his . .
Where a charge had been registered with priority over a caution with the consent of the cautioner, the registered charge has priority over the caution, and the proprietor of the charge can sell the land free of the cautioner’s rights. . .
The claimants asked the defendant to find a purchaser for their house for a fee. Pretending to be a purchaser under an assumed name, he obtained from them the documents necessary to register the transfer, and received a further payment towards the . .
The claimant sought compensation from the Land Registrar for losses arising from following the results of an index map search. They relied upon a certificate showing certain land to be unregistered, in entering into a contract for its sale. A . .
A house owner allowed occupiers in and gave a informal option for them to buy it. He later charged it and sold the property to the chargee in satisfaction of the debt. Before buying it the mortgagee enquired of the occupiers as to whether they . .
Where land had been registered in the name of a transferee as a result of a fraud and where there had been no consideration and it had been in breach of a fiduciary duty, the owners retained an overriding interest under the act, and the transferee . .
The registered freehold proprietor (S) of a property lived abroad, his mother having power of attorney. His sister and her husband, Mr and Mrs Hammond, had the register altered to show themselves as the freehold proprietors. The primary case was . .
The plaintiffs contracted to buy a plot of registered land with a house to be built on it. The developer had charged the estate as a whole to a bank to secure the development finance. The developer became insolvent and the bank sold the estate as . .
An option to purchase the reversion contained in a seven-year lease was protected under s. 70(1) by virtue of the tenant’s occupation under the lease. ‘It is vital . . . to bear in mind that what we are seeking to ascertain at present is whether . .
The significance of the distinction between occupation and rights was that although the deserted wife was in actual occupation of the former matrimonial home, the quality of her rights was not such as to be capable of amounting to an overriding . .
One of two joint proprietors of registered land forged the signature of the other and sold the property. The purchaser charged it to mortgagees who had no notice of the forgery.
Held: The original proprietor was entitled to have the Charges . .
The plaintiff company acquired the registered freehold title of a house in 1957. The house was already demised on a long lease. The leaseholder had sublet to the defendant, who, by continuous non-payment of rent, had, by 1963, acquired a . .
The plaintiff had and exercised a right of pre-emption entitling him to take a long lease of a garage. He was at the time also licensee of the garage.
Held: The use of the garage amounted to actual occupation, thereby protecting the right as . .
The plaintiff, an elderly widow, transferred her house into the name of her lodger, but remained in occupation of the house, on exactly the same basis as before, until the lodger sold the house and the purchaser had mortgaged it to a building . .
The transferees of land registered themselves as first registered proprietors of land including two narrow strips of woodland. The court had found that the strips in fact belonged to a neighbour who had acquired title by adverse possession.
The claimant sought rescission of a consent order for specific performance made in an earlier action. The purchasers had not complied simply with the order, but had sought to bring back certain parts of the original contract.
Held: Once an . .
A notice of a charge, short of registration, does not give priority over an earlier un-registered charge. The effect of the notice was limited to that stated in the Act. . .
The tenant overpaid rent, including a payment in May 1997 on advice that the payment would be recoverable following litigation establishing that it was an overpayment. The court later held that the payments in question were indeed overpayments. The . .
Grant of s38 rights in a Highways agreement didn’t operate as grant of future public rights of way, nor create an overriding interest. . .
A section 38 agreement was an overriding interest, and created a public right which was binding on purchaser. . .
Registered land was bought with an advance from the plaintiff. The transfer and charge were registered one month later, but in the meantime, the buyer’s parents moved in. When the buyer defaulted, his mother resisted possession proceedings, saying . .
(Bristol County Court) The relevant date for identifying occupation for section 70 was the date of execution of the building society’s charge. On appeal the case was decided on a different point. . .
The plaintiff had transferred her house to her lodger, expressing it to be for her love and affection for him. The judge at first instance had held that the true intention of the plaintiff had been that she would continue to live there as before and . .
The leaving of furniture in a flat or having a key to the flat or making occasional use of it was not enough to constitute actual occupation. Where A permits B to occupy land on B’s own behalf by way of gratuitous licence, A’s capacity as licensor . .
The respondent stayed on in the family home owned by her husband after he had left, and resisted a possession order sought by the chargee. The husband had charged the house as security for his business debts.
Lord Wilberforce described the . .
Claim by a wife that she has a beneficial interest in a house registered in the sole name of her husband and that her interest has priority over the rights of a bank under a legal charge executed without her knowledge. The case raises a point of . .
Cross J set out the nature of overriding interests: ‘Overriding interests are, speaking generally, matters which are not usually shown on title deeds or mentioned in abstracts of title and as to which, in consequence, it is not possible to form a . .
Mr. Boyle sought compensation in respect of a rectification of the register by removal from his title of land belonging to a neighbour. Since Mr. Boyle’s registered title was subject to overriding interests, he would not have been entitled to . .
To defeat a defence of adverse possession, the plaintiff must succeed in an action which itself had been commenced within the twelve year period. A squatter does not succeed to the title that he has disturbed: by sufficiently long adverse possession . .
LAND REGISTRATION – EASEMENTS AND PROFITS – the rule in Wheeldon v Burrows – section 62, Law of Property Act 1925 and whether contrary intention must be expressed in the conveyance  UKUT 307 (LC) Bailii England and Wales Registered Land Updated: 13 January 2022; Ref: scu.670632
UTLC RESTRICTIVE COVENANT – JURISDICTION – leasehold covenants – registered lease – whether deed of variation caused a surrender and re-grant – less than 25 years since variation – s.84(12), Law of Property Act 1925 – s.58, Land Registration Act 2002 – covenant ‘to use and occupy . . solely and exclusively as a self-contained … Continue reading Stevens v Ismail: UTLC 4 Feb 2016