Links: Home | swarblaw - law discussions

swarb.co.uk - law index


These cases are from the lawindexpro database. They are now being transferred to the swarb.co.uk website in a better form. As a case is published there, an entry here will link to it. The swarb.co.uk site includes many later cases.  














Registered Land - From: 1985 To: 1989

This page lists 8 cases, and was prepared on 27 May 2018.

 
Kling v Keston Properties Ltd (1985) 49 P&CR 212
1985
ChD
Vinelott J
Registered Land
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 an overriding interest as regards the garage. His right was protected under section 70(1). The court rejected a submission based on section 59 of the Act.
Land Registration Act 1925 59 70(1)(g)
1 Cites

1 Citers



 
 Celsteel Ltd v Alton House Holdings Ltd; ChD 1985 - [1985] 1 WLR 204
 
City of London Building Society v Flegg And Another [1986] Ch 605
1986
CA

Registered Land
Where money was raised on mortgage of registered land to discharge an existing incumbrance (and so in exercise of the power conferred by s.28(1) Law of Property Act 1925 by reference to s.71(1)(i) Settled Land Act 1925) and paid to two trustees for sale, the rights of occupying beneficiaries were overreached.
1 Citers


 
AJ Dunning and Sons (Shopfitters) Ltd v Sykes and Son (Poole) Ltd [1987] Ch 287; [1987] 2 WLR 167
1987
CA
Lord Justice Dillon
Registered Land
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."
Land Registration Rules 1925 76 77
1 Citers


 
City of London Building Society v Flegg And Another [1988] AC 54; [1987] 3 All ER 435; [1987] 2 WLR 1266; [1987] UKHL 6
14 May 1987
HL
Lord Bridge of Harwich, Lord Templeman, Lord Mackay of Clashfern, Lord Oliver of Aylmerton and Lord Goff of Chieveley
Land, Registered Land
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 further charges. Held: The fact of occupation did not add to the parents' rights as equitable chargees, or as tenants in common. A balance was to be found between making property available to be traded, and protecting the rights of equitable owners. The parents' rights were overreached by the charges.
The provisions of the Land Registration Acts were designed to operate in parallel and consistently with the property legislation governing unregistered land.
Lord Oliver of Aylmerton: "… the philosophy behind both the Land Registration Act 1925 and the Law of Property Act 1925 was that they should operate in parallel, and it would, therefore, be surprising if it were found that the two systems were not constructed so as to dovetail into one another." and
"If then, one asks what were the subsisting rights of the respondents [the occupying beneficiaries] referable to their occupation, the answer must, in my judgment, be that they were rights which, vis-à-vis the appellants [the mortgagee], were, eo instante with the creation of the charge overreached and therefore subsisted in relation to the equity of redemption."
Law of Property Act 1925 14 - Land Registration Act 1925 70(1)(g)
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ lip ] - [ Bailii ]
 
Ashburn Anstalt v Arnold (1) [1987] EGLR 71; Times, 09 November 1987; [1987] 284 EG 1375
27 Oct 1987
CA
Fox, Neill and Bingham LJJ
Landlord and Tenant, Registered Land
Houses in Kensington were let together for a term of just over 50 years. There was just one title for the headlease. Informal subleases of parts had been granted granted at no rent. After several dealings with the titles, and the plaintiffs came to be the freeholders and landlords of the informal leases. When they sought possession, the defendants claimed that the leases were protected having overriding interests as tenants in possession. The plaintiffs said that there could be no leases without rent being paid. Held: A lease did not require payment of rent to be valid, and the defendants had overriding interests.
Fox LJ said "the overriding interest will relate to the land occupied but to nothing else".
1 Citers


 
Ashburn Anstalt v Arnold (2) [1989] Ch 1; [1988] 2 All ER 147
25 Feb 1988
CA
Fox, Neill and Bingham LJJ
Landlord and Tenant, Registered Land
Various leases of properties had been granted. Legal and General occupied the property under an arrangement under which they paid no rent. The landlord sought possession, saying that the agreements were licences not tenancies because of the absence of rent. Held: The payment of rent is not an essential qualification for a tenancy agreement. The tenants occupied the land with an overriding interest. Their right to occupy premises until the owner gave one quarter's notice certifying he needed the premises for redevelopment created a tenancy binding on third parties. The term was not uncertain so as to defeat the lease.
Registered Land Act 1925 70(1)(g)
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Brookfield Developments Ltd v The Keeper of the Registers of Scotland 1989 SLT (LT) 105
1989


Scotland, Registered Land
The word "inaccuracy" in section 9(1) of the 1979 Act should be construed widely so as to include any incorrect or erroneous entry in or omission from the Register. The position was that the Keeper could not create something from nothing by an erroneous step.
Land Registration (Scotland) Act 1979 9(1)
1 Citers


 
Copyright 2014 David Swarbrick, 10 Halifax Road, Brighouse, West Yorkshire HD6 2AG.