• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

'The Land Registration Act 1925 was not intended to alter the practice of physical inspection, which was to remain subject to doctrine of notice. More recent interpretations fail to recognise this fact'. Discuss

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Name: Divya Basanta Lala Class Group 6 2003 Exam Paper Question 6B 'The Land Registration Act 1925 was not intended to alter the practice of physical inspection, which was to remain subject to doctrine of notice. More recent interpretations fail to recognise this fact'. Discuss, with reference to S70(1)(g) of the Land Registration Act 1925 (now Schedule 1, para 2, Schedule 3, para 2 of the Land Registration Act 2002) Introduction The Land Registration Act (LRA) 1925 was one of the main statutes born from the 1925 code of legislation. The main purpose of the 1925 legislation was to make land more freely alienable and to reduce the onerous task of a purchaser in investigating title, whilst at the same time affording protection to the owners of equitable interests in the land. The main problem in land law is to achieve a balance between the interests of a purchaser (which includes a lesser and a mortgagee) on the one hand, and those who hold an equitable interest in the land on the other hand. The LRA 1925 brought a totally new system of conveyancing which required eventual registration of title to all land. ...read more.

Middle

As stated earlier, the purchaser had to inspect the title deed (which were piles of paper relating to legal and equitable interests in the land) very closely to see whether the seller actually owned what it was trying to sell to him. This documentary evidence was important to account for how the land became vested in him. The investigation had to go back to at least 15 years and this would provide the root of title. If the investigation of title was correctly carried out, it was considered that the purchaser had constructive notice of all interests, whether legal or equitable. However, there were some equitable interests which would not be known to exist if the purchaser relied only on investigation of title. They were equitable interests that did not appear on title deed and could be discovered by physical inspection of the land (first recognised in Hunt v Luck (1901)). Physical inspection meant to allow the purchaser to enquire about any interests, for example in cases of shared occupancy with the seller, and eradicate the limits of investigation of title. Thus, establishing constructive notice was a time-consuming and expensive process. ...read more.

Conclusion

Under the LRA 2002 Schedule 1 para 2, only actual occupation qualifies for overriding interests. Thus, when a person has a proprietary right and is in actual occupation, he has an overriding interest. But if the purchaser makes a physical inspection of the land and this person's rights are concealed or not disclosed, then the interests are not overriding. Conclusion Thus, from a modern stance, the basic problem with occupation-based overriding interests is that to require purchasers to go beyond what appears on the register and this defeat the purpose with which the LRA 1925 was introduced. Those writing the LRA wished to create a fool-proof system of conveyancing in the mirror principle which states that all interest should be perfectly reflected in the register and any reference to actual occupation is anomalous. However, it can be also be argued that the provision in s70(1)(g) specifically providing for overriding interests except where enquiry is made and those interests are not disclosed never intended to alter the practice of physical inspection. This loophole was left mainly to protect innocent parties who have equitable interests but failed to register them. This form of notice offers a fair and just solution to those parties. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our University Degree Land Law section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related University Degree Land Law essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    'The 'mirror' principle, the 'curtain' principle and the 'insurance' principle form the tripod on ...

    4 star(s)

    of the LRA protects the rights of every person in actual occupation of the land. The significance of these overriding interests is that they bind any disponee of registered land and therefore it can be seen that the mirror principle does not always reflect exactly the current position which the register is meant to provide to those carrying out searches.

  2. The Land Registration Act 2002 heralds major changes to the law and procedures regarding ...

    forms of relief.[59] However detriment to support estoppels may be unfair to the registered proprietor. This is because the squatter may act to their detriment by making prejudicial lifestyle choices which are unrelated to land. [60] In addition, this exception allows a 10 year period of possession to be presented

  1. Would the abolishment of adverse possession in relation to both registered and unregistered land ...

    allows the removal of registered title owners from the protection of the registry if they fail to evict squatters. It also creates a pathway for squatters with genuine, deserving interests in the land to acquire adverse possession. It is left to question why the veto rule was not extended to unregistered land with the enactment of the Land Registration Act.

  2. The enactment of the Land Registration Act 2002 offers an opportunity for a fresh ...

    Arguably such a case will cease to be an issue once electronic conveyancing is in practice as the transactions will be simultaneous and the registration gap will be removed. Finally, the LRA 2002 makes significant changes to the doctrine of adverse possession.

  1. Proprietary Estoppel - Asserting a right or preventing a fact? It will be ...

    A good example in which one can see the functionality of the doctrine is in Crab v Arun District Council29. Here the claimant was induced by another to believe that a he had a right of access over the defendant's land, in reliance on this assurance the defendant sold his land.

  2. Concept of proprietary estoppel - it could be said that the courts are restrictive ...

    Thompson MP says it is easy to see why a test based on a broad principle of unconscionability should be viewed should be viewed with some suspicion; it may be seen as providing scope for judges to apply idiosyncratic notions of fairness to different factual scenarios, the result being uncertainty.

  1. Land law problem question - access

    Livesy?s beneficial interest is likely deemed to be a valid and enforceable property, and it arose before the disposition is made. Second, he has to be in actual occupation of the land which the right exist, or purchaser has the actual knowledge of the claimant?s interest.

  2. Land Law Case. In advising Mary, it must be noted what rights she has ...

    Similar to Eric?s case, it can be seen in the cases of ?Noakes & Co Ltd v Rice? (1902) and ?Bradley v Carritt? (1903) that the advantage ABCwood (CEM) have got are proposed to continue after the redemption and as in the above cases the terms were held to be void by the House of Lords.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work