The bank had sought and obtained an order recognising the vaidity of its charge over the land. The land had belonged to the defendant, but he said that the property had been registered by a fraudulen ttransfer, and charged by the transferee in the name of the third party who had in turn charged it to the bank. The court had said that the transfer was voidable, not void, and that therefore the charge was effective. The defendant now sought leave to appeal.
Held: Leave was refused. By virtue of s58 of the 2002 Act and the other provisions of that Act the register is conclusive, subject only to its rectification pursuant to the provisions of the Act itself. Lloyd LJ was prepared to accept that Mr Guy (who was unrepresented) had an arguable case that the transfer to Ten Acre was not voidable but void and that the registration of Ten Acre as proprietor was a mistake that should be corrected, but it did not follow that the registration of the bank’s charge was also a mistake within the meaning of paragraph 2. There was no prospect of Mr Guy being able to establish notice on the part of the bank.
Judges:
Carnwath, Lloyd LJJ
Citations:
[2008] EWCA Civ 452
Links:
Statutes:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Barclays Bank Plc v Guy ChD 16-Jan-2008
The defendant owned development land in Manchester. Under a transfer apparently signed by him the land came to be registered in the name of a company called Ten Acre Ltd, creating a charge in favour of Barclays Bank, which was duly registered on the . .
Cited by:
See Also – Guy v Barclays Bank Plc CA 8-Dec-2010
In an earlier action the claimant said that he had been defraused of land by a forged transfer. The transfereee had charged the land to the respondent bank who in that action gained a decision that its charge was effective, the transfer being . .
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: 17 July 2022; Ref: scu.270366
