A transfer of part of land identified the land by reference to a red line on a plan being part of a registered. The court held that the seller’s covenants of title implied under the rules took effect subject to the interests of the registerd owners of the land not part of the seller’s title.
Held: The buyer’s appeal succeeded. The red line did include land not in the seller’s title. ‘The Register’ referred not to the full Land Registry registers, but to the register entries for the particular title at issue. The vendors were liable for the breach of covenant of good title. Lord Justice Dillon: ‘The transfer is concerned to differentiate between three parcels of land . . and it does so exclusively by reference to the plan on the transfer and the colouring on that plan . . the colouring on the plan is thus the dominant description of each parcel . . where parcels in a conveyancing document as described by reference to a plan attached to the documents, the natural inference is that it was the intention that anyone should see from the documents alone, which means from the plan on it what land the document was purporting to pass.’
Judges:
Lord Justice Dillon
Citations:
[1987] Ch 287, [1987] 2 WLR 167
Statutes:
Land Registration Rules 1925 76 77
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Beale v Harvey CA 28-Nov-2003
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Registered Land
Updated: 28 July 2022; Ref: scu.235517
