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 answered. The purchaser had bought the land from chargees of the buyer, and who were aware of the possible legal interest of the claimant.
Held: ‘the main characteristics of an option are that it is an undertaking to sell property to the grantee if the latter wishes to purchase it, usually within a specified period.’ An option had been created which was not void for uncertainty, and an equitable interest had arisen in favour of the claimant. On cancellation of the application for first registration, the land reverted to the seller on trust for the buyer who then had only an equitable interest. His chargee had therefore only an equitable interst and could proceed to enforce his charge only by a court order. The order made only affected the buyer’s equitable estate, and therefore the chargee was unable to convey the legal estate. The claimant had established that it would be unjust for the rectication not to be made.
The Honourable Mr Justice Mann
 EWHC 1235 (Ch)
Law of Property Act 1925 90, Land Registration Act 1925, Land Registration Act 2002 65 Sch 4
Cited – London and Blenheim Estates v Ladbroke Retail Parks Ltd CA 1-Jun-1993
The land-owner sold part of his land, granting easements over the retained land, and an agreement that, if further plots were purchased, similar easements would be granted. The agreement stated that the purchaser should have the right to give notice . .
Cited – Pearce v Watts CA 9-Jun-1875
An agreement for the sale included the reservation: ‘[The Vendor] reserves the necessary land for making a railway through the estate to Prince Town.’ Specific performance was sought by the purchaser, and the vendor objected that it was void for . .
Cited – London and South Western Railway Co v Gomm CA 1882
A grant was given to repurchase property, but was void at common law for the uncertainty of the triggering event.
Held: The ‘right’ to ‘take away’ the claimants’ estate or interest in the farm was immediately vested in the grantee of the right . .
Cited – Midland Bank Trust Co Ltd v Green (No 1) HL 11-Dec-1980
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, . .
Cited – James Hay Pension Trustees Ltd v Cooper Estates Ltd ChD 20-Jan-2005
The court ordered rectification of the land register where not to do so would give the then registered proprietor an unattractive and uncovenanted ransom position. . .
Cited – Horrill v Cooper CA 1999
(Year?) The appelant had bought unregistered land knowing of restrictive covenants and paying accordingly, but the covenants had not been registered and his title was free of them. He now appealed an order for rectification of the register which had . .
Cited – Horrill v Cooper QBD 1998
Restrictive covenants were registered against unregistered land, but were not revealed by a subsequent formal search with the result (as found) that as matter of technicality the purchaser took free from them. However, that purchaser knew of the . .
Cited – Pallant v Morgan ChD 1952
The agents of two neighbouring landowners orally agreed in the auction room that the plaintiff’s agent would refrain from bidding at auction and that the defendant, if his agent’s bid was successful, would divide the land according to an agreed . .
Cited – Banner Homes Group Plc v Luff Developments and Another CA 10-Feb-2000
Competing building companies agreed not to bid against each other for the purchase of land. One proceeded and the other asserted that the land was then held on trust for the two parties as a joint venture.
Held: Although there was no formal . .
Cited – Greasley v Cooke 1980
For a proprietary estoppel to arise the plaintiff must have incurred expenditure or otherwise have prejudiced himself or acted to his detriment. However, once it has been established that promises were made, and that there has been conduct by the . .
Cited – Gillett v Holt and Another CA 23-Mar-2000
Repeated Assurances Created Equitable Estoppel
Repeated assurances, given over years, that the claimant would acquire an interest in property on the death of the person giving the re-assurance, and upon which the claimant relied to his detriment, could found a claim of equitable estoppel. The . .
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, Contract, Equity
Updated: 05 December 2021; Ref: scu.226740