Tag: Registered Land

The Official Custodian of Charities, Reverend Armitt, Hall, Hammett As The Current Vicar and Churchwardens of The Parish of Bisley and West End v Faithful: LRA 17 Nov 2016

Alteration and rectification of the register – adverse possession – effect of issuing county court possession proceedings

Citations:

[2016] EWLandRA 2015 – 0701

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

School Sites Act 1841, Limitation Act 1980

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Registered Land

Updated: 06 February 2022; Ref: scu.578222

Potier, Regina (on The Application of) v Land Registry: Admn 10 Dec 2015

Renewed application for permission to apply for judicial review of the Defendant’s refusal to register the Claimant’s ‘life tenancy’ over a property.
Held: the claim was unarguable.

Judges:

Lang J

Citations:

[2015] EWHC 4214 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Registered Land

Updated: 29 January 2022; Ref: scu.573853

Stodday Land Ltd and Another v Pye: ChD 7 Oct 2016

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 County court, against whose finding and order that the notices were invalid, both defendants now appealed. The landlords argued that the usual requirement for such a notice to be given by the person in whom the reversionary estate is vested did not apply to an agricultural tenancy.
Held: The court rejected that argument. Distinguishing Scribes, West, the argument under section 141 of the 1925 Act failed also.

Norris J
[2016] EWHC 2454 (Ch), [2016] WLR(D) 519
Bailii, WLRD
Land Registration Act 2002 27(10, Agricultural Holdings Act 1986 96, Law of Property Act 1925 141(2), Land Registration Act 2002 24
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Stait v Fenner 1912
The lease to Fenner contained a break clause. The lease was legally assigned to X and then to Y. Y then agreed to assign back to Fenner (but no formal assignment was entered). Fenner then ‘assigned’ to Z (the contract saying that he was not obliged . .
Cited – Schalit v Joseph Nadler Ltd CA 1933
Mr Nadler was a lessee of property, part of which he sublet to the plaintiff. In 1931 he made a declaration of trust, under which he declared that the property was held in trust for his company, Joseph Nadler Ltd. Shortly after the company purported . .
Cited – Freeman v Hambrook 1947
. .
Cited – Thompson v McCullough CA 1947
Thompson had agreed to buy a tenanted property, had paid part of the purchase price, and had received a conveyance in escrow pending payment of the balance. He at that point gave McCullough notice to quit. Two months later Thompson paid the balance . .
Cited – Lever Finance Ltd v Needleman’s Trustee ChD 1954
In a mortgage, the transferee of a registered charge appointed a receiver during the ‘registration gap’.
Held: Until registration the transferee could not exercise the statutory power to appoint a receiver. . .
Cited – Smith v Express Dairy Limited ChD 1954
Express Dairy (as registered owner) let a shop to Smith, but then transferred its interest to a subsidiary company. The subsidiary did not become registered as owner but nonetheless served notice to quit on Smith.
Held: Unless the subsidiary . .
Cited – Divall v Harrison CA 1992
A notice to quit the agricultural land had been given in the name of the residuary beneficiary, not in the name of the executors in whom the reversion was still vested.
Held: The notice was invalid. The residuary beneficiary was not the . .
Cited – Renshaw v Magnet Properties South East LLP 2008
(Central London County Court) . .
Cited – Lankester and Son Ltd v Rennie and Another CA 2-Dec-2014
The transfer of a lease remained unregistered.
Held: The court acknowledged the importance of not confusing the equitable rights as between transferor and transferee with the legal rights as between landlord and tenant. . .
Distinguished – Scribes West Ltd v Relsa Anstalt and others CA 20-Dec-2004
The claimant challenged the forfeiture of its lease by a freeholder which had acquired the registered freehold title but had not yet registered its ownership. The second defendant had forfeited the lease by peacable re-entry for arrears of rent, and . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Registered Land, Landlord and Tenant, Agriculture

Updated: 24 January 2022; Ref: scu.570346

Nobes v Lloyds Tsb Bank Plc (Miscellaneous Cases : Miscellaneous): LRA 20 May 2016

Application to alter register – registered proprietor of freehold title acquiring leases to which the freehold was the immediate reversion- registered leasehold title cancelled and notices of leases deleted from freehold title- freehold proprietor subsequently alleging that the leases were not determined and that the cancellation of the leasehold title and the removal of the notices of the leases from the freehold title was a mistake- freeholder proprietor applying to correct the mistake- receievrs appointed under mortgage of freehold alleging there was no mistake

[2016] EWLandRA 2014 – 0312
Bailii

Registered Land

Updated: 19 January 2022; Ref: scu.567058

Mclaverty v Cassidy: LRA 21 Mar 2016

LRA Application for a Restriction – claim to a beneficial interest in Equity – extent of direct and indirect contributions to justify the claim – HELD – Sufficient evidence of direct contributions to substantiate such a claim – Sufficient evidence of common intention – Land Registry ordered to allow the application for restrictions

[2016] EWLandRA 2015 – 0420
Bailii

Registered Land, Trusts

Updated: 16 January 2022; Ref: scu.564465

Port of London Authority v Devere and 7 Others – 0733-0755: LRA 27 Feb 2013

LRA Rivers, Waterways and Foreshore – Trial of a preliminary issue as to whether the Applicant can establish documentary title to part of the bed and foreshore of the River Thames; the ‘ad medium filum’ rule; true construction of the words ‘in front of or immediately adjacent to’; Port of London Act 1908, sections 1, 7; Port of London Act 1912; Port of London Act 1968, section 212, and Schedule 11; Thames Conservancy Act 1857, sections 50, 51; Thames Conservancy Act 1894, sections 58, 59; Port of London (Consolidation) Act 1920, section 7; Crown Lands Act 1702, section 5; Crown Lands Act 1853, section 5; Crown Lands Act 1829, section 8; Law of Property Act 1925, section 62(3); Poor Law Amendments Act 1868, section 27;

[2013] EWLandRA 2011 – 0733-0755
Bailii
England and Wales

Registered Land, Land

Updated: 03 January 2022; Ref: scu.550827

Lankester and Son Ltd v Rennie and Another: CA 2 Dec 2014

The transfer of a lease remained unregistered.
Held: The court acknowledged the importance of not confusing the equitable rights as between transferor and transferee with the legal rights as between landlord and tenant.

[2014] EWCA Civ 1515
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Applied – Brown and Root Technology Ltd and Another v Sun Alliance and London Assurance Comp Ltd CA 19-Dec-1996
The claimant had a personal right to exercise a break clause in a lease of which it was the registered proprietor, that right coming to an end when it assigned the lease. The lease was assigned to another company within the group which took over . .

Cited by:
Cited – Stodday Land Ltd and Another v Pye ChD 7-Oct-2016
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 . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant, Registered Land

Updated: 24 December 2021; Ref: scu.539436

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

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 was about whether the strip of land in dispute, which adjoined the physical surface of the road, had ever been dedicated to the public as part of a highway, and that turned upon the true construction of a written agreement between the then owner and the county council. The adjacent highway (for which the dedicated strip was to facilitate an improvement) had later been designated a trunk road, but that had no consequence for the determination of the dispute. In an otherwise unimpeachable summary of the effect of land becoming part of a highway, Mr Lewison said: ‘The effect of ‘trunking’ a highway is that the highway vests in the Minister (now the Secretary of State). The extent of such vesting is such part of the land as is necessary for the highway authority to perform its statutory functions. It has been described as the ‘top two spits’.’

Mr Lewison QC
Times 16-May-2000, Gazette 31-May-2000, (2000) 80 P and CR 324
Land Registration Act 1925, Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989
England and Wales
Cited by:
Appeal from – Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions v Baylis (Gloucester) Ltd and others CA 16-Dec-2002
. .
Cited – London Borough of Southwark and Another v Transport for London SC 5-Dec-2018
Question as to the meaning of the GLA Roads and Side Roads (Transfer of Property etc) Order 2000. When the highway was transferred was only the working surfaces, the road surface and the airspace and subsoil necessary for the operation, maintenance . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Registered Land

Updated: 10 December 2021; Ref: scu.89097

Scottish and Newcastle Plc v Raguz: CA 24 Jul 2003

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 1925 Act was as guarantor, and that his obligation might be discharged by a claimant’s wrongful act.
Held: The 1925 Act implied an obligation of indemnity, and was unaffected by any act of the claimant.
The indemnity applied also to any VAT charged to the rent: ‘The original lease constituted a contract for a relevant supply by the landlord to the tenant for which the rent covenanted to be paid was consideration. In view of the terms of s. 89(3) it is indisputable that when the lessor opted to tax the supply there was a change in the VAT charged on that supply. That change occurred before the supplies with which this claim is concerned were rendered. Accordingly the express terms of s. 89(1) requires VAT at the relevant rate to be added to the rent as part of the consideration for the supply by the Lessor to the Tenant. In my view it follows that the default of the Tenant in paying the rent including the VAT thereon falls within the terms of the implied covenant because it constitutes a failure to pay the rent ‘by and in the registered lease reserved and contained’ as amended in accordance with s. 89(1).’

Lord Justice May Lord Justice Sedley The Vice-Chancellor
[2003] EWCA Civ 1070, Times 09-Sep-2003, [2004] LandTR 11
Bailii
Land Registration Act 1925 24(1), Landlord & Tenant (Covenants) Act 1995
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Yeoman Credit Ltd v Latter CA 1961
The distinction between contracts of guarantee and indemnity are real and important and to be retained. . .
Cited – Harris v Boots Cash Chemists (Southern) Ltd ChD 30-Jun-1904
The case concerned the question whether an original lessee could enforce by injunction against a successor in title to the term, a provision in a lease precluding alteration without consent. The ground on which he sought to do so was a covenant by . .
Cited – Butler Estates Company Ltd v Bean CA 1942
. .
Cited – Allied London Investments Ltd v Hambro Life Assurance Ltd (No 2) ChD 1984
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 . .
Cited – RPH Ltd v Mirror Group (Holdings) Ltd 1993
. .

Cited by:
See Also – Scottish and Newcastle Plc v Raguz CA 6-Mar-2007
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 . .
See Also – Scottish and Newcastle Plc v Raguz ChD 27-Jul-2004
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 . .
See Also – Scottish and Newcastle Plc v Raguz ChD 11-Apr-2006
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 . .
See Also – Scottish and Newcastle Plc v Raguz HL 29-Oct-2008
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 . .
Cited – Mason v Boscawen ChD 18-Dec-2008
The landlord had opted to charge VAT on part of the rent. The tenant fell into arrears and now challenged a notice to quit which included the VAT. The court was asked what constituted ‘rent’ for the purposes of a demand for rent founding a notice to . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant, Registered Land

Updated: 30 November 2021; Ref: scu.184868

Bradshaw v Wilson (Beneficial Interests, Trusts and Restrictions : Express Agreement): LRA 16 Feb 2018

The parties had been in a relationship for several years, and had a child together. The Respondent bought a property, funded by a large cash element which he provided and the balance on mortgage. The Applicant owned her own home (where they lived together with their son) but was not able to sell it before the Respondent’s purchase. When she did eventually sell, she paid a lump sum of pounds 30,000 (almost the entire equity) to the mortgagees of the Respondent’s property. She said this was done pursuant to an agreement that she was entitled to an interest in his property. The Respondent denied this. It was held that she was entitled to a beneficial interest in the Respondent’s property but there was insufficient evidence to determine the shares.

[2018] UKFTT 176 (PC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Registered Land

Updated: 30 November 2021; Ref: scu.616298

The Chief Land Registrar v Franks, Franks, Bedward, Bedward: LRA 7 Jul 2011

LRA (Practice and Procedure : Appeals) Effect of Adjudicator’s order being set aside on appeal – whether a cancelled application can be restored to the register with its original priority date if appeal successful – third party interests. – (1) This reference is to the Court of Appeal decision on appeal from, and upholding, the High Court decision at: Franks and Anor v Bedward and Anor [2010] EWHC 1650 (Ch) (13 July 2010).
(2) That High Court decision was itself an appeal from the first instance decision of the Adjudicator that the Applicants’ application be cancelled as sanction for non-compliance with directions – .

[2011] EWLandRA 2005 – 1122
Bailii
England and Wales

Registered Land

Updated: 25 November 2021; Ref: scu.517433

Osborne, Osborne v Lawton, Noyes, Sandford-Fawcett ): LRA 8 Mar 2011

LRA Adverse possession under paragraph 5(4) of Schedule 6 to the Land Registration Act 2002. Disputed land fenced in as part of the garden of the house being bought by the Applicants. Reasonableness of Applicants’ belief that the disputed land was part of the property which they bought.

[2011] EWLandRA 2010 – 1066
Bailii
Land Registration Act 2002
England and Wales

Registered Land

Updated: 25 November 2021; Ref: scu.517432

Norfolk Naturalists Trust v Lumley, Ellison (0940): LRA 23 Sep 2011

LRA (Rivers, Waterways and Foreshore : Accretion and Diluvion) Accretion and diluvion – effect of change in Mean High Water Mark – principles of construction of pre-registration deeds – purported grantor of land without a title subsequently acquiring title to the same land – estoppel perfecting grantor’s title – effect on subsequent purchaser

[2011] EWLandRA 2010 – 0940
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
See Also – Norfolk Naturalists Trust v Lumley, Ellison (0939) LRA 23-Sep-2011
LRA (Rivers, Waterways and Foreshore) Accretion and diluvion – effect of change in Mean High Water Mark – principles of construction of pre-registration deeds – purported grantor of land without a title . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Registered Land

Updated: 25 November 2021; Ref: scu.517435

The Chief Land Registrar v Silkstone, Silkstone, and Tatnall: LRA 14 Jul 2011

LRA (Practice and Procedure : Status of Parties) Respondents claiming right of way over Applicant’s land seeking to withdraw from proceedings immediately prior to hearing preserving the right to bring further proceedings alleging the right of way in the future. Effect of reference by the Chief Land Registrar on the power of a party to withdraw an application or objection without a decision being given on the merits. Exercise of discretion of Adjudicator to permit such a withdrawal.

[2011] EWLandRA 2008 – 0823
Bailii
England and Wales

Registered Land

Updated: 25 November 2021; Ref: scu.517434

Rossetti Ltd v Thresher Wines Acquisitions Ltd, First Quench Retailing Limited, Whitbread (UK) Limited: LRA 8 Sep 2009

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 of Property Act 1925 – whether exceptional reasons exist to refuse alteration – Article 1 Protocol 1 ECHR – unjust enrichment – delay – abuse of process

Owen Rhys DA
[2009] EWLandRA 2008 – 0633
Bailii
England and Wales

Registered Land

Updated: 25 November 2021; Ref: scu.517403

Port of London Authority v David Frank Devere and 7 Others – 0755: LRA 27 Feb 2013

LRA Rivers, Waterways and Foreshore : Construction of Relevant Legislation – Trial of a preliminary issue as to whether the Applicant can establish documentary title to part of the bed and foreshore of the River Thames; the ‘ad medium filum’ rule; true construction of the words ‘in front of or immediately adjacent to’

[2013] EWLandRA 2011 – 0755
Bailii
Port of London Act 1908 1 7, Port of London Act 1912, Port of London Act 1968 212 Sch 11, Thames Conservancy Act 1857 50 51, Thames Conservancy Act 1894 58 59, Port of London (Consolidation) Act 1920 7, Crown Lands Act 1702 5, Crown Lands Act 1853 5, Crown Lands Act 1829 8, Law of Property Act 1925 62(3), Poor Law Amendments Act 1868 27
England and Wales

Registered Land

Updated: 25 November 2021; Ref: scu.517387

DeVere, Regina (on The Application of) v Land Registry: Admn 21 Oct 2013

Renewed applications for permission to apply for judicial review for separate claims which were heard together since they are closely connected and are concerned with two decisions of the Chief to register the title of two adjacent and separate parcels of land beneath and adjacent to the Grand Union Canal at Brentford in London. The relevant stretch of the canal runs into the River Thames and has the River Brent running within or close by it.
Held: Both of Mr DeVere’s applications were both an abuse of process and totally without merit.

Anthony Thornton QC HHJ
[2013] EWHC 2477 (Admin)
Bailii

Registered Land

Updated: 22 November 2021; Ref: scu.516966

Norwich and Peterborough Building Society v Steed: CA 5 Mar 1992

The land-owner had given his mother power of attorney over his home. Her signature was forged on a transfer, and the transferee executed a charge in favour of the appellant. Transfer and charge were registered. A first line of cases restored the defendant to the title, but the original transfer had been found voidable, and the charge left in effect.

Purchas, Butler-Sloss, Scott LJJ
[1992] EWCA Civ 5, [1993] Ch 116
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
See Also – Argyle Building Society v Hammond CA 1984
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 . .

Cited by:
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, Trusts

Updated: 14 November 2021; Ref: scu.262622

Link Lending Ltd v Bustard: CA 23 Apr 2010

The respondent had been detained in a secure mental unit for a year. In that time her home was charged to the appellant. She asserted that she had been a person in actual occupation. The chargee now appealed against a finding that the respondent had been such a person. She had been taken advantage of and persuaded to sell the house to a third party who had created the charge, but not paid her. Though she was not personally at the house, her personal effects were still there. Her condition meant that she would not have had capacity at the time she executed the transfer.
Held: The facts suggested points both ways, but ‘the courts are reluctant to lay down, or even suggest, a single legal test for determining whether a person is in actual occupation. The decisions on statutory construction identify the factors that have to be weighed by the judge on this issue. The degree of permanence and continuity of presence of the person concerned, the intentions and wishes of that person, the length of absence from the property and the reason for it and the nature of the property and personal circumstances of the person are among the relevant factors.’
The decision was one of fact and was to be disturbed only for clear error. No such error had been shown.

Mummery LJ, Jacob LJ, Sullivan LJ
[2010] EWCA Civ 424, [2010] 28 EG 86, [2010] 18 EG 98 (CS), [2010] 2 EGLR 55
Bailii
Land Registration Act 2002 29
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Strand Securities Ltd v Caswell CA 2-Feb-1965
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 . .
Cited – Stockholm Finance Ltd v Garden Holdings Inc 26-Oct-1995
Robert Walker J considered how a court should decide on whether a person was in actual occupation of a house: ‘Whether a person’s intermittent presence at a house which is fully furnished, and ready for almost immediate use, should be seen as . .
Applied – Thompson v Foy ChD 20-May-2009
Lewison J discussed the decision in Etridge: ‘In the light of the arguments before me, there are some additional observations I should make. First, although in Etridge Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead described the paradigm case of a relationship where . .
Cited – Royal Bank of Scotland v Etridge (No 2); Barclays Bank plc v Harris; Midland Bank plc v Wallace, etc HL 11-Oct-2001
Wives had charged the family homes to secure their husband’s business borrowings, and now resisted possession orders, claiming undue influence.
Held: Undue influence is an equitable protection created to undo the effect of excess influence of . .
Cited – Williams and Glyn’s Bank Ltd v Boland HL 19-Jun-1980
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 . .
Cited – Abbey National Building Society v Cann HL 29-Mar-1990
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 . .
Cited – Hoggett v Hoggett CA 1980
The court considered whether there had been an effective surrender of a property at law.
Held: Where a person claims to have been in occupation of land at law, but was not physically present, it was necessary to show that his occupation was . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Registered Land

Updated: 11 November 2021; Ref: scu.408600

Cantelmi and Another v Revenue and Customs: UTTC 26 Jan 2016

Appeal from a decision of Judge Ann McAllister, sitting as a Judge of the Property Chamber

[2016] UKUT 35 (TCC)
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Cantelmi, Nakli v Hart LRA 13-Nov-2014
Application for a defined boundary . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Registered Land

Updated: 10 November 2021; Ref: scu.562414

Phillips and Others v Vaughan: LRA 4 Mar 2016

LRA Application to close registered title by documentary title owners/ first registration of possessory title based on adverse possession/ Whether factual and mental elements of adverse possession established/ Whether the occupation was with consent/ Whether witness statements made by their apparent author/ whether a witness offered an inducement to give evidence/ Whether a further adjournment of proceedings to facilitate a third opportunity to obtain handwriting evidence should be grant

[2016] EWLandRA 2014 – 0497
Bailii
Limitation Act 1980 15 17, Land Registration Act 2002 11(7)

Registered Land, Limitation

Updated: 02 November 2021; Ref: scu.564466

J A Pye (Oxford) Ltd v The United Kingdom: ECHR 30 Aug 2007

UK Advers Possession Law – Not Compliant

The claimant had said that the UK law which allowed it to lose land by virtue of twelve year’s occupation by a squatter, interfered with its right to ownership of property.
Held: The UK law on adverse possession did comply with the Convention. The limitation period of twelve years for actions for the recovery of land pursued a legitimate aim in the general interest. The contracting states enjoyed a wide margin of appreciation in implementing social and economic policies, and it was not unreasonable for a state to provide for the extinction of title where the requirements of adverse possession were satisfied.

[2007] ECHR 700, [2007] ECHR 705, Times 01-Oct-2007, 44302/02, [2007] All ER (D) 177, (2008) 46 EHRR 45
Bailii, Bailii, Bailii
European Convention on Human Rights, Land Registration Act 2002
Human Rights
Citing:
Appeal from – J A Pye (Oxford) Ltd v The United Kingdom ECHR 15-Nov-2005
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 . .
Cited – J A Pye (Oxford) Ltd and Others v Graham and Another HL 4-Jul-2002
The claimants sought ownership by adverse possession of land. Once the paper owner had been found, they indicated a readiness to purchase their interest. The court had found that this letter contradicted an animus possidendi. The claimant had . .
Admissibility – J A Pye (Oxford) Ltd v The United Kingdom ECHR 8-Jun-2004
Admissibility . .

Cited by:
Applied – Ofulue and Another v Bossert CA 29-Jan-2008
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 . .
Cited – Lancashire County Council v Buchanan Admn 7-Nov-2007
The defendant estate agent was prosecuted for misdescribing the ability of his client to convey good title to the land offered. The seller did not initially have a registered possessory title to part of the land.
Held: The agent’s appeal . .
Cited – Baxter v Mannion ChD 18-Mar-2010
B appealed against an order for rectification against him of the land register returning ownership to M. B had obtained registration with possessory title, claiming to have kept horses on the field for many years in adverse possession of it. M had . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Registered Land

Leading Case

Updated: 02 November 2021; Ref: scu.263548

F and H (Didsbury) Ltd v Plant, Plant, Bond: LRA 4 Mar 2013

LRA Charges and Charging Orders – Charging order – first and second respondents were the joint owners of land both at law and in equity – applicant obtains judgment against second respondent – second respondent executes a document assigning or purporting to assign her beneficial interest in the land to the third respondent – district judge makes interim and final charging orders over the second respondent’s interest in the land in favour of the applicant – applicant applies to register a restriction to protect the charging orders – respondents object – issues as to whether the respondents are entitled to object in light of the charging orders having already been made and whether the assignment to the third respondent was a sham or not.
[2013] EWLandRA 2012 – 0614
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 08 October 2021; Ref: scu.510148

Sinclair v Morrison, McNealis: LRA 9 May 2012

LRA Easements and Profits A Prendre – Acquisition of easement by prescription; easement on foot over existing right of way granted by deed; identification of the dominant tenement; whether user as of right; whether such user was permissive and/or continuous; Prescription Act 1832, section 4; period next before suit or action; Limitation Act 1980, sections 15(1), 38
Edward Cousins Adj
[2012] EWLandRA 2011 – 0331
Bailii
Prescription Act 1832 4, Limitation Act 1980 15(1) 38
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Harris v Flower CA 1904
The servient land-owner alleged an excessive user by which it was attempted to impose an additional burden on the servient tenement in the use of a right of way for obtaining access to a factory erected partly on the land to which the right of way . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 08 October 2021; Ref: scu.510152

Port of London Authority v Devere and 7 Others: LRA 27 Feb 2013

References: [2013] EWLandRA 2011_0733-0755
Links: Bailii
LRA Rivers, Waterways and Foreshore – Trial of a preliminary issue as to whether the Applicant can establish documentary title to part of the bed and foreshore of the River Thames; the ‘ad medium filum’ rule; true construction of the words ‘in front of or immediately adjacent to’; Port of London Act 1908, sections 1, 7; Port of London Act 1912; Port of London Act 1968, section 212, and Schedule 11; Thames Conservancy Act 1857, sections 50, 51; Thames Conservancy Act 1894, sections 58, 59; Port of London (Consolidation) Act 1920, section 7; Crown Lands Act 1702, section 5; Crown Lands Act 1853, section 5; Crown Lands Act 1829, section 8; Law of Property Act 1925, section 62(3); Poor Law Amendments Act 1868, section 27;
Last Update: 04-Jan-16 Ref: 550827