Legal Aspects of Property Development
Legal Aspects of Property Development Stage 1 The 1995 Landlord and Tenant (Covenants) Act 1995 (LTCA 1995) abolished the doctrine of privity of contract in respect of new tenancies. This means that all leases created on or after the 1st January 1996 have abolished the doctrine of privity of contract. Therefore leases created on or after the 1st January 1996 are often referred to as 'new leases' and leases created before the 1st January 1996 are often referred to as 'old leases'. Before the LTCA 1995 came in to force, the doctrine of privity of contract stated that the original tenant remained liable for the covenants contained in the lease for the entire term of the lease and the tenant was also liable when he assigned the lease. This means that the tenant was still liable for a breach of covenant after he has assigned the lease. For example if a tenant entered in to a 10 year lease and then assigned it after the second year, then in the 8th year the new tenant who took on the assignment wasn't paying the rent and hadn't been insuring the properties then the Landlord has the option of suing either the tenant who took on the assignment or the original tenant who assigned his interest 6 years ago. The tenant remains liable for all the covenants in the lease for the entire term of the lease they signed. For example if a tenant entered in to a 30 year lease and
A lease is an estate in land of defined duration. It is capable of subsisting; as a legal estate, but it must be created in the manner required by the law and satisfy the definition of a 'term of years absolute' otherwise it is an equitable interest.
A lease is an estate in land of defined duration. It is capable of subsisting; as a legal estate, but it must be created in the manner required by the law and satisfy the definition of a 'term of years absolute' otherwise it is an equitable interest.1 There are two types of lease; fixed which is self determining 6months, 1 year, 50 years. The vital feature is that it is a fixed maximum duration. Periodic, weekly, monthly, annually, it continues indefinitely until terminated giving notice. A lease is sometimes referred to as hybrid- proprietary interest in land but roots in contractual relationship between landlord and tenant. There are also 3 essential requirements for a lease, according to Lord Tepleman the lessee or tenant must be granted: exclusive possession, for a fixed or periodic term; and in consideration of a premium (lump sum) or periodical payments. A licence is different it's a permission to do some act which would otherwise be unlawful in regard to the land of another person. It prevents what otherwise would be a tort i.e. trespass. There are five categories of licence: Bare licence, licence coupled with equity, licence coupled with the grant of an interest, licence & estopppel and contractual licence. The category into which a licence falls has consequences in terms of both revocability and assignability. The distinction between a lease and a licence -
The Impact of the Land Registration Act 2002 on Adverse Possession
Property Law Assignment III Michael Roberts Tutor Group F: Anne Street Property Law Assignment III "As a result of the changes made by the Land Registration Act 2002, the law of adverse possession no longer operates as a thieves' charter." Discuss. To analyse the extent to which the Land Registration Act 2002 (LRA) has affected the law of adverse possession, and how it could be seen as operating as a thieves' charter, this discussion will be broken into four main sections. First the situation before the LRA 2002 will be explained, followed by a reflection of to what extent it was a thieves' charter in the first place, if at all. After that the changes brought about by the LRA 2002 shall be described with consideration given to its effects and whether it has changed the situation for thieves. Following this discussion a conclusion will be drawn. As this discussion concerns only changes made by the LRA 2002 the application of adverse possession to goods will not be considered. Hopefully the essay will arrive at the conclusion that adverse possession does still operate somewhat as a thieves' charter but that this effect has been largely diminished by the LRA 2002. Prior to the statute, the law of adverse possession was quite favourable to takers of land who could be construed as thieves. The basic laws were that anybody who takes exclusive possession over land acquires
Case law analysis - Advice Martin On Whether He Has Any Rights, Which Are Enforceable Against Midlays Bank? Is The Arrangement With Des Enforceable Against Samantha And Chris?
> Introduction 3 > Advice Martin On Whether He Has Any Rights, Which Are Enforceable Against Midlays Bank? 5 > Is The Arrangement With Des Enforceable Against Samantha And Chris? 9 > References 12 > Bibliography 13 > Introduction An extraordinary and important category of equitable proprietary rights in land emerges in the range of beneficial entitlements generated by various forms of trust affecting land (1). The transfer of a legal title in land carries with it, prima facie, the absolute beneficial interest in the property conveyed and there is no need to distinguish between legal and equitable ownership when land is vested upon one person. But if some other person requires a beneficial interest upon the land, then that person must demonstrate that the beneficial title does not coincide with the legal ownership and that equity would intervene on his behalf (Allen v Snyder)(2). The owner of the legal estate in land is described as holding the legal title on trust for the claimant who has the beneficial or equitable interest upon the land. All beneficial interest under a trust are governed by the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996, and according with the case of Gissing v Gissing (3), a trust only exists if the person who has the legal title is able to show that 'holds it as a trustee upon trust to give effect to the beneficial interest of
Explain and critically analyse the process under the Land Registration Act 2002 for: i) the first registration of registrable estates ii) the registration of interests created by registrable dispositions
Question One Explain and critically analyse the process under the Land Registration Act 2002 for: i) the first registration of registrable estates ii) the registration of interests created by registrable dispositions (i) The Land Registration Act 2002 has been exemplary in setting the rules for Land registration up to date. The newly amended act has done away with the inherent discrepancies of the act and ambiguities related to land registration. The salient highlights of the Land Registration Act 2002 harp on the simplification of procedures and have overhauled the entire system. This is one major change that has been effected in the last 75 years of history of the nation. The other major change is the inclusion of electronic conveyance. Other laws such as the law of adverse possession have undergone updates.1 Now after having gone through the entire Act, I firmly believe that the Act has undergone a much needed revamping and thus now it stands a much more standardized and more than anything else a modernized one. In this regard, what is of particular importance is the first registration of registrable estates. The new set of regulations for the first registration of registrable includes transfer of a freehold estate of land, transfer of an existing leasehold estate of land, grant of a new leasehold estate of land and first legal mortgage. But this rule does not apply to
Under English law co-ownership must take place by way of trust, this being the trust of land. It is an equitable right which divides the legal ownership of property from equitable.
Under English law co-ownership must take place by way of trust, this being the trust of land. It is an equitable right which divides the legal ownership of property from equitable. While the trustee enjoys legal ownership and also holds land on behalf of the beneficiaries, the beneficiaries are the equitable owners and are entitled to the value of the property. Although at common law the trustee is the absolute owner of trust property and beneficiaries have no right at all. Concurrent ownership of land arises in a situation where two or more people are simultaneously entitled to enjoy the rights of land, either leasehold or freehold. The law of co-ownership is to be found in the Law of Property Act 1925 and the Trust of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996, at common law, which significantly amended the 1925 Act in relation to co-ownership. Prior to the 1925 reforms the legal relationship between individual co-owners could take several forms subsequently causing numerous problems. However since 1926, co-ownership is recognised ether by way of joint tenancy or a tenancy in common. These two forms regulate the sharing of ownership; however they essentially differentiate in the aspects of the nature of rights that are conferred on the owners.1 When land is subject to a joint tenancy, each owner is treated as being entitled to the whole of that land. There is only one formal
Lease/Licence Distinction
LANDLORD AND TENANT Task 1: Explain the essential characteristics of a Lease and critically distinguish between a Lease and a Licence.. In order to address the differences it is necessary first to look at the characteristics of each and then analyse effectively the present day position and what the effect of that distinction is. Historically the distinction in terms of frequent litigation arose as a result really of the Rent Acts whereby residential tenants were given full security of tenure and in effect had a home for life unless one of the grounds for possession as set out in the Act were made out. Indeed there are similar provisions in relation to Assured Tenancies under the Housing Act 1988 apart from the fact that there are certain mandatory grounds for possession notably Ground 8. Landlords therefore took steps to use a mechanism to try and get round the Rent Acts to show that the occupancy was merely one of licence which in effect was a personal contract to occupy but not on an exclusive basis. For some time this was effective until cases developed but the law was confusing at that time to say the least and even the House of Lords found difficulty in grappling with the problems. In order to address the issues it is therefore necessary to consider what a Lease actually is. A lease creates an estate in Land1 which basically is leasehold testate for a term of years
General Principles of Land Law, Fixtures, Chattels
Land Law Essay Student No.0900091 ) The first essay question considers the issues of fixtures and chattels during the process of conveyancing of the property. There is abundance of case law in this particular area, and there is quite a few of well established principles. Although many of the cases vary according to their own facts. Land and chattels are treated differently in law. Land is real property1, and chattels are more of a personal property. A contract to sell property does not include items of personal property, unless they are expressly included. Sometime an item which once was a chattel may turn into the fixture, and this is when the doubts arise. The statutory provision dealing with this issue is Law of Property Act 1925, s.62. So, if Fred and Wilma are able to prove that the items are fixtures, and that Mr. Stone removed them after the exchange of the contracts they should be able to recover. Basically there are two tests to determine whether an item has become part of the freehold. First one is so-called: 'the method and degree of annexation'. The second one concentrates on 'the object and purpose of the annexation'. The earlier law was using the first of the tests, while later cases developed the second test, mainly to alleviate injustice where limited owners
Landlord and Tenant Law
Unit: Landlord and Tenant Law 'The difference between 'repairs' and 'improvements' is of great importance in the context of landlord and tenant law, but the case law on the subject often makes it difficult to clearly distinguish between the two.' Explain and discuss, with particular reference to relevant case law. Within the context of landlord and tenant law, a major issue relating to the renting and letting of property is that of repairs, maintenance and improvements. A tenancy agreement with a repairing covenant can deal with these matters so that the tenant and the landlord are aware of their responsibilities. In relation to tenancy agreements of residential property, the parties' freedom to act is substantially determined by statute, in particular by the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985. In respect of tenancy agreements for commercial properties however, the parties are largely free to agree their own repairing obligations. Thus it is crucial that the terms of the tenancy agreement are carefully worded in order to avoid ambiguity. However, the distinction between a 'repair' and an 'improvement' has become blurred and where disputes have occurred, both tenants and landlords have sought redress in the Courts. Mackenzie & Phillips (2008 p199) state that, "Every lease, even the most informal, contains provisions which define the obligations of the landlord and tenant
The 1925 Legislations Aims.
The 1925 Legislations Aims In 1925 a radical reform of property legislation occurred, this consisted of 6 acts; - Law of Property Act - Settled Land Act - Trustee Act - Administration of Estates Act - Land Charges Act - Land Registration Act These all aimed to make conveyancing easier and safer for the buyer, as I will discuss. When buying a piece of land a purchaser should check, that the vendor has "good title" and there are no third party rights over the land. Before the 1925 Acts were enforced the number of legal estates that existed had soared, plus there were some many different ways people could hold an interest in another persons land. This was awful when it came to purchasing land, since a buyer of land needs to know whether he is subject to any third party rights. The law stood that a legal right "is good against the whole world" (Sexton 2001:54) even if a purchaser does not know of the interest. Equitable rights are the same but they do not bind "a bona fida purchaser of the legal estate in the land for value without notice." This is known as the doctrine of notice. Basically it describes a purchaser of a "legal estate" with "clean hands" ( Coatsworth v Johnson1886) who didn't know of the interest or wouldn't have been expected to have known. A purchaser had to be able to prove this, which often was a difficult task, as notice can be actual, constructive or