LAWS leclure Video transcript: Fundamentals of Land Registration in England and Wales Prof Martin Dixon, Property law This lecture concerns the fundamentals of land registration in England and Wales. It will discuss the major provisions of the Land Registration Act 2002 that entered force in October 2003. The Act has been in force just over 15 years and a number of issues have emerged concerning its operation and its interpretation. The Land Registration Act 2002 replaced entirely the Land Registration Act 1925, although itutilized many of the concepts of the earlier legislation. The Law Commission report, which led to the Land Re conveyancing revolution. Ithas been evolution than revolution, ration Act 2002, is entitled a however, that the Land Registration Act 2002 is more Itis often said that the Land Registration Act 2002 concerns registered land to contrast it with unregistered land. This isa convenient description, although not entirely accurate. In England and Wales, land itself is not registered. Instead, titles to land are registered, such as the freehold and legal leases over seven years. This means that in relation to any given plot or parcel of land there mayin fact, be more than one registered title. There may be a freehold, a long lease, say, 99 years, and a short lease, say, 15 years. All of these registered titles will be cross-referenced against each other, but they all relate to the same plot of land, Another misconception concerning land of registered title or registered land is that everything to do with the land is entered on a register. This is not, and never has been the case, Registered land means land of registered title. Many other things, such as mortgages, rights of way, governance may also be registered, but some things are not registered, and some things are noteven capable of being registered. Consequently, the Land Registration Act 2002 is not meant to present a complete picture or perfect mirror of the land itself and the rights of people in it. The Land Registration Act essentially creates four different classes or types of property right. First, there are registered titles, such as freeholds and leases over seven years. Second, there are registered charges, otherwise known as legal mortgages. Thirdly, there are those rights which are entered on the register or registered against a registered title. These are other people's rights in the land, and they are protected by entry on the register by means of a notice. These rights have no specific name, but are often referred to as registered protected interests, Fourthly, there are, what are called, overriding interests, although the legislation itself has a longer name, fered interests which override. These overriding interests are by definition not on the register. They are effective against the land or binding on the land, even though they are not registered, they override the interest of the registered proprietor. There are many reasons why a system of land registration might be introduced, Most of these reasons are practical, they are about ensuring the effective use of what is essentially a limited resource land. We should not forget as well that land is fixed in time and space, itis immovable November 2018 Page1 of 10Fundamentals of Land Registration in England and Wales property. Itis different from a computer, a mobile telephone, money because it cannot be moved and placed somewhere else, itis fixed in time and space. That is why there are often different rules about real property land than there are about personal property, such as laptops, mobile phones, and cash, Slide two gives us five reasons why a system of land registration might be introduced, it brings certainty. A system of land registration ensures that there is clarity about who owns the land, the extent of that ownership, and the nature of that, ownership. Land registration also facilitates or encourages transactions it makes it easy to buy, and sell, and mortgage land. The register provides evidence of ownership and does away with old fashion and lengthy conveyancing transactions. Thirdly, in England and Wales, a fundamental Point of land registration is to guarantee the title ofa registered proprietor, in other words, the owner, When somebody is registered as the owner, when somebody is the registered proprietor, their ownership is guaranteed by the fact of it being on the register. Somebody dealing with that person need only inspect the register to be certain that the person they are dealing with is the owner, and this will facilitate any transactions. Fourthly, a land registration system allows people rights in the land short of ownership, such as rights of way, options to purchase, covenants to protect their rights by entering them on the register. If these rights, these third-party rights are entered on the register, they are both protected ifthe land is sold and the purchaser is fully aware of them. Thereis certainty about the ownership, but there is also a degree of certainty about the people with rights in the land. Finally, one point of land registration is to create an open-access register so that any person may inspect the register and discover some basic information about, the land. In England and Wales, the Land Register is fully searchable electronically, For the payment of a small fee, any person can search the register and discover who owns any pai plot of land, and whether any other personhas rights in that land. lar This register does not give a complete picture of the land, because the register is not a perfect mirror. There are some things not on the register, such as overriding interests. The register does provide basic information that can be useful forall matter of public reasons, including the certain secure transactions with land. Slide three addresses perhaps the most fundamental ofall questions about the land registration system in England and Wales, namely, whether we have registration of ttle or ttle by registration. The Land Registration Act 1925, the old law, clearly established a system of registration of ttle, This was because it superseded the old system of unregistered land, so it built on the ideas that were familiar at the time. Registration of title means that a person’s ownership is investigated and transferred by traditional methods: checking the validity ofthe title, checking that the person has power to sell the land, checking whether the details provided about the land are accurate and the transfer of the land is. carried out by a document, a conveyance, and then that conveyance is registered. In other words, the person who registers the title already owns it. They have acquired the title under normal conveyancing procedures, and then they have proceeded to register it by sending it to the Land Registry. Such registration was essentially a record of underlying legal facts, or underlying legal transactions. Where those transactions took place and were valid, the new owner was registered. lf, however, the underlying legal transaction was not valid-~perhaps there was a fraud, or a mistake, or some other reason for invalidity. When it was registered, it was still recorded, but the register did not cure or solve the defect. The title was still weak, because although registered, it ‘was the product of a mistake on invalid transaction. Thus, the register could be changed to remove the invalid title. Page2 of 10Fundamentals of Land Registration in England and Wales In this sense, the register could sometimes mislead because a title might be registered, but it could have been transferred by an invalid method to the new owner, so the new owner could have the title removed because of the mistake. Under this system (that of the 1925 Act, it was possible to say that there was a true owner, the person who really owned it, and perhaps the registered owner, the person who was now registered under a transaction that was invalid. The true owner could apply to have the register changed. In this very real way, the register was not, and did not pretend to be a perfect mirror of all interests in the land, and indeed, did not pretend to be a perfect reflection of the title. People registered titles, but the real issue was whether that title had been transferred to them properly. One of the main purposes of the Land Registration Act 2002 was to introduce title by registration instead of registration of title. This was a deliberate and planned move, designed to make the register the source of a person's title, rather than simply a record of a person's title. Theidea was not to record preexisting legal facts, but for the register to be the very reason why a person owned the land. Therefore, under the Land Registration Act 2002, the act of registration of atitle actually confers the title on the new proprietor. Until that registration takes place, the new owner has no title because they have not been registered with it. The act of registration is what confers the title, The title is not complete until the registration has taken place. Consequently, there is only one owner, the registered owner. There is no such thing as the true owner, who is different from the registered owner. The register is everything, This means, as the second point on the slide makes clear, that any defect in the underlying transaction would not invalidate a registered title. The leading case here being Swift Ist v Chief Land Registrar. Even if there is a mistake leading to the registration of a person as proprietor, the act of registration cures the defect. Registration itself is the source of title. We have title by registration, not registration of title. This is the point made forcefully in Section 58 of the Land Registration Act, which is considered later. However, as the third bullet point on the slide makes clear, the register can stil be altered if there is a mistake, but alteration of the register is not inevitable, even if there has been a mistake. Any change or alteration to the register must take place accordingto the terms of the Actitself (as found in Schedule 4), not because of some underlying defect in the land. A good example of this is Walker v Burton, where the register proprietors really never owned the land if one applied old- fashion property law. However, the mere fact of their registration gave them title. The register was not changed, even though it was clear there had been a mistake. The register was the source of their title, and in this case, the mistake was not rectified. As the fourth bullet point makes clear, however, the register is still not a perfect mirror ofthe land. Itis a more conclusive mirror, because the register is conclusive, but there are stil occasions or opportunities for offregister transactions. These are much reduced when compared to the Land Registration Act 1925, but offregister transactions are not eliminated. For example, we still have overriding interests, being interest not entered on the register, and itsstill possible all be it in much less circumstances for a person to claim title by adverse possession or squatting. Off register transactions still exist, although they are not eliminated. le number five identifies the main or key provisions of the Land Registration Act 2002. These are the provisions which encapsulate the main policies of the legislation. They are often the provisions that are most commonly examined and the provisions that are very often discussed in the decided cases. First, we have Section 58 of the Land Registration Act. This is the central titled guarantee Page3 of 10Fundamentals of Land Registration in England and Wales provision. This is the provision that establishes title by registration. Its effect is illustrated by the important case of Swift Istv Chief Land Registrar. In that case, a lender Swift 1st had a registered mortgage. n fact, that mortgage had been created fraudulently, and according to underlying property rules, should not have been valid. It should not have been a valid mortgage. However, it was registered, and the guaranteed provision of Section 58 applied to itand cured any of the defects. Consequently, when this valid mortgage was removed from the register, because there had been a mistake in its creation, the owner of the mortgage, Swift 1st, was entitled to compensation fromthe Land Registry. The mortgage was valid by reason of its registration, so its removal caused loss for which an indemnity could be paid. importantly, Swift Ist Chief Land Registrar overrules the earlier cases of ‘Malory v Cheshire Homes and Fitawilliam vRichall, which had decided the opposite. Those two earlier cases, Malory vFitzwilliam, are no longer good law. The second important provision is Section 23 of the Land Registration Act. This talks about the powers of a registered proprietor. It makes it clear that when somebody is registered, they have all of the powers of an absolute owner of the land unless the contraryis on the register. It complements Section 23 complements Section 58. Section 58 guarantees title, Section 23 ensures that the person registered with title has full power to deal with the land, even if there had been some underlying defect in how they obtained tile. The third key provisions are the priority rules. These are found in Sections 28 and 29 of the Act and are discussed in detail later. They link in with overriding interests in Schedule 3 of the Act. The purpose of the priority rules is to identify the circumstances in which a new registered propi bound or not bound by preexisting property rights. Sections 28 and 29 and Schedule 3 cont bindingness rules of the Land Registration Act 2002. These are central to the operation of the system. Fourthly, Schedules 4 and 8 contain the provisions concerning when the register may be changed or technically altered and the circumstances in which somebody may be able to obtain an indemnity or compensation from the Land Registry. These are the provisions which provide the insurance principle of land registration. Fifthly, an important provision of the Actis Schedule 6, concerning adverse possession, Adverse possession is a method by which a person may obtain title by the mere fact of possessing the land, Itis argued, therefore, that adverse possession contradicts ttle by registration because itis based on title by possession. One significant aim of the Land Registration Act was to significantly reduce the opportunity for adverse possession of a registered ttle. In this regard, the 2002 Act has been. largely successful. je number six elaborates on Section 58 and the Title Guarantee provision. As mentioned earlier, Section 58ensures that a registered title- this might be a freehold, a leasehold over seven years, or, for these purposes, a mortgage. Section 58 ensures that this registered ttle is valid and effective simply by reason ofits registration (Walker v Burton). This is so, as we've just explained, even if there is an underlying problem in the transaction by which the new owner came to obtain the title Swift Ist vthe Chief Land Registran. This means, therefore, that any person dealing with the registered proprietor can be absolutely certain that this person owns the land and can deal with it. Anybody dealing with the registered proprietor does not have to go back into past transactions the land. They do not have to search old documents, they do not have to investigate title, they merely have to check the register. Of course, such a person, the new purchaser, will look at the land to see ifit's suitable, to see if it meets their demands, to see if any other person is using the land. Page4 of 10Fundamentals of Land Registration in England and Wales They will also ask the existing registered proprietor about the land, but the title is guaranteed, simply by reason of the fact that itis registered. Section58. However, as the fourth bullet point makes clear, Section 58 guarantees title It does not make it indefeasible. Some land registration systems create indefeasible title. This means that once registered, the new registered owner can never lose the title unless they do it voluntarily, The register cannot be changed, because the registration not only confers the title, it makes it indefeasible in the sense of the registered owner cannot lose it in any, or only, very limited circumstances. That is not the basis of the Land Registration Act 2002. The Land Registration Act 2002 guarantees the title of the existing registered proprietor. It gives security to the persons dealing with that title. However, in the Land Registration Act 2002, it is possible for the register to be changed, for the registered proprietor to have their title removed. Those circumstances are well-defined, and it is not common, but the title is guaranteed, it is not indefeasible. If therefore, the register is altered by removing or changing a registered ttle, the innocent person affected will receive compensation from the Land Registry-an indemnity payment. Title guarantee does not mean that the current owner will always keep the land. It means that the current owner is guaranteed to be the owner for the time being and may keep the land if there isa mistake. Or, and this is important, or may receive compensation if the land is taken away. Title Guarantee means either that the registered proprietor keeps the land, or that the registered proprietor loses the land but receives instead compensation from the Land Registry. We have a Title Guarantee system, not a Title Indefeasible system. n 23, ie number seven talks about the second important provision of land registration, Sec owners’ powers. Although a simple idea, Section 23 is crucial to the running of the land registration system. It says that a registered proprietor, for example, the person who owns the freehold, or owns the long lease, or owns the mortgage, the registered proprietor has al of the powers of an absolute owner, They may sell the land, they may lease the land, they may mortgage the land. Anybody dealing with this registered proprietor, therefore knows that the registered proprietor has proper authority to carry out the transaction. Somebody dealing with the registered proprietor does not have to check whether they are really entitled to sell the land, because Section 23 says a registered proprietor has all of the powers of an absolute owner. Ifit is intended that the register proprietor's powers to deal with the land should be limited, this can be achieved, but only by making an entry on the register. ‘The registered proprietor's powers can be limited by placing a restriction against the title. A restriction, as its nameimplies, restricts the powers of the registered proprietor. However, if there is no restriction, the registered proprietor has all of the powers, even if it was intended that they should not. For example, a trustee of land should deal with the land for the benefit of the beneficiaries. If however, there is no restriction on the title of a trustee, that trustee has full power to sell, ease, mortgage, or otherwise deal with the land. A restriction should have been placed to stop them, but if tis not, the trustee's actions are going to be effective. Of course, the trustee might be liable in breach of trust, but the land transaction could not be challenged. Consequently, Section 23 is the counterpart to Section 58. Section 58 guarantees title, Section 23 says that the person with that guaranteed title has all of the powers to deal with the land unless the register says otherwise. le eight analyses the priority rules of the Land Registration Act. These are found in Sections 28 and 29 of the Act and linked to Schedule 3. The priority rules are critical to the operation of a land PageS of 10Fundamentals of Land Registration in England and Wales registration system. Whereas, Sections 58 and 23 describe and guarantee the position of the proprietor, the owner. What about all of those other people that have rights in the land? IFX is the registered proprietor, that title is guaranteed, Section 58, and X has all of the powers of a registered owner. What about A, who has a right of way; or B, who has an option; or C, who has a covenant over the land? What about people who also have property rights in the land which are not titles? IFX, the registered proprietor transfers the land to Y, the new registered proprietor, what happens to A,B, and C's rights? They are property rights, but do they bind the new proprietor, are they effective still against the land? Sections 28 and 29 answer these questions. Section 28 is referred to as the basic priority rule, and it was applied in a case called Halifax vPopeck. Section 28 says, where the new registered proprietor is not a purchaser, where the new registered proprietor is not a purchaser, then the new registered proprietor is bound by all pre-existing property rights, in my example, the rights of A, B, and C. If the new owner is not a purchaser, for ‘example, they receive the land by way of gift, then all property rights are binding on that person, all property rights have priority to the new registered owner. Importantly, the rights of A, B, and C do not need to be registered, they do not need to be overriding interests, and the new owner does not even need to know about them. When the new owner is not a purchaser, all property rights are binding, whether they are on the register or not. This is the basic priority rule of Section 28. However, of course, most transfers of land are not gifts, they are in some way sales of the land. Section 29 tells us the position when the existing registered proprietor X sells the land to a new registered proprietor Y. In this case, Y is a purchaser for valuable consideration. In those cases, which are by far the most common, when the new owner is a purchaser, then Section 29 applies. This says that when the new purchaser is registered with the title, then the new purchaser takes the land free from all property rights, unless those property rights are either entered on the register or amount to overriding interests. Section 29 is sometimes known as the special priority rule, because it gives special priority or protection to the interests of a purchaser. The purchaser who has successfully registered takes the land free from all property rights unless those property rights are on the register or amount to overriding interest within Schedule 3. Therefore, in my example, A, B, and C, if A, B, and C want to ensure their rights are protected, they should enter them onthe register and, of course, the new purchaser will be aware of them because the new purchaser will inspect to the register. f the rights of A, B, and C are not on the register, they might still be protected as overriding interests, but this depends upon whether they meet the definition of overriding interests in Schedule 3. Itis difficult to overemphasize the importance of the priority rules. In every case, we need to know whether the new owner is not a purchaser, in which case, section 28 applies, or whether the new owner is a purchaser, in which case, section 29 applies. The result is different depending on which section is used. Slide 9 gives a little more detail of the application of the special priority rule in section 29. Remember it has two parts, if the purchaser is registered, then that purchaser takes the land free of everything, except interest on the register or overriding interests. The first two bullet points elaborate this First, the purchaser is bound by interest on the register. This is done by means of a notice which is an entry on the register. This notice can be unilateral or agreed, sections 32 and 33 of the act. Page6 of 10Fundamentals of Land Registration in England and Wales Whether the notice is unilateral or agreed does not affect the validity of the protected whether itis entered by means of a unilateral or an agreed notice, the protection is the same. The difference is that a unilateral notice is done by the right holder, A,B, or Cin my example, and might be challenged. Whereas an agreed notice is done either by order ofthe court or with the agreement of the owner of the land and cannot be challenged. The degree of protection is the same, but one notice is challengeable, the other is not. The scheme of the land registration act encourages virtually all rights to be entered by means of a notice. If this works, the register will become much more of a mirror. However, as the second bullet point makes clear, the purchaser, under section 29, is bound by interest on the register and. overriding interests. These are property rights not entered on the register but which are nevertheless binding. They are contained or defined in Schedule 3 of the act. Overriding interests are therefore binding property rights which are not on the register. There is always the risk that the purchaserwill be bound by an overriding interest because they may not have been aware of it. However, most of overriding interests, if not al, are easily discoverable by the purchaser inspecting the land or by asking the seller. Very, very few overriding interests are in fact hidden from a purchaser. Schedule 3 contains around 15 types of overriding interests. However, many of these are limited in effect and scale. The three important types of overriding interests are found in paragraph one, paragraph two, and paragraph three of the act. Paragraph one talks about legal leases of seven years or less, although there are some small exclusions. Legal leases of seven years or less are overriding interests. Remember that legal leases over seven years are registerabe tte. This is the counterpart to that provision, Obviously, a purchaser can easily discover the existence of a legal lease by simply looking at the land and to see who is living there or working there. The second key overriding interest, and possibly the one that is most risky for a purchaser, is found in paragraph two. The property rights of persons in discoverable actual occupation. Thisis the provision about which there is much litigation and considerable academic comment. An ‘examination could concentrate on overriding interests alone without dealing with the other aspects of the act. The key point about paragraph two is that to have an overriding interest the claimant must have a property right, but any property right, and then must be in discoverable actual occupation of the burdened land. The cases of Thompson v Foyand AIB v Turner discuss what it means to be in actual occupation, but note that this overriding interest has two parts. First, there must be a property right, and secondly, the owner of this property right must be in actual occupation of the burdened land. The third major type of overriding interest is found in paragraph three of Schedule 3 and itis implied legal easements. implied legal easements are easements which arise out of the conduct of the parties and which are not expressly mentioned in a document. Because they are not expressly mentioned in a document, there is nothing to send to the land registry to register. Consequently, paragraph three says that implied legal easements are overriding in some circumstances. The detail of this should be discussed when answering a specific question on overriding interests and will be discussed again when the law of easements is considered The critical point for now, however, is to realize thata purchaser will be bound by things on the register, which, of course, they could discover by looking at the register, but also by overriding interests, which are not registered but which are usually discoverable by looking at the land or talking to the sdler. Slide number 10 discusses alteration and indemnity in the land registration system as found in Schedules 4 and 8to the act. You will remember that the land registration act establishes title Page7 of 10Fundamentals of Land Registration in England and Wales guarantee, not an indefeasible, unchangeable title. Thus the register may be changed. it may be changed, however, only according to the terms of Schedule4 alteration. If itis changed, there is the possibility that the person thereby prejudiced can claim an indemnity or compensation under Schedule 8, Here again, is an illustration that we guarantee title but that itis insured by reason of an indemnity even if we change the register. The provisions on changing the register appear to be complex, but the next full bullet points on slide 10 provide the heart of thesystem. First, the register may be changed to bring it up to date as in the case of NRAM v Evans. This is. where, for example, somebody's name is wrong or the address is wrong or there has been some technical error and something has been put on the register which shouldn't be there. The register may be changed to bring it up to date and to deal with these trivial errors. These are not mistakes and so do not trigger compens Secondly, however, when there is a mistake, this means that the register may bealtered, Schedule 4, it does not mean it will be altered, Therefore, a mistake gives an opportunity to change the register, not a certainty. See Schedule 4 of the Act. Thirdly, we need to distinguish different types of mistake. Mistakes which do not prejudicially affect a registered title will usually result in a change to the register. This is called an alteration. So, these are situations where there has been a mistake, but the mistake does not prejudicially affect the registered title. It does not causeharm, so it does not result in land being lost or ownership rights being changed. There isa mistake, but its relatively trivial and usually, under Schedule 4, the register will be changed. As the next bullet point makes clear, however, mistakes which are prejudicial are serious and these may lead to rectification. A rectification is where the register might be changed, not must, might be changed to give effect to deal with a mistake which is [Link] example, a mistake which means the registeredowner might lose some land or their tite altogether. These are prejudicial mistakes which might lead to a rectification. Slide 11 deals with the significant mistakes, those which prejudicially affect the title of a proprietor. These are the mistakes that can generate difficulty in the system. The first point is that mistake is broadly defined. See, for example, Walker v Burton and Baxter vMannion and also some comments in NRAM vEvans. Soa mistake might be an entry on the register that should not be there or it might be that there is no entry on the register when there should have been one or it might mean that the wrong person is registered as the owner. ‘The cause of the mistake might be innocence, it might be dishonesty, it might be fraud, it might be misunderstanding about the underlying facts. So, a mistake is broadly defined. Secondly, and importantly, a mistake in one transaction, for example, a transaction from A to B, means that all subsequent transactions with the land also might be regarded or rather can be regarded as. mistaken. So, if the transaction from A to Bis a result of a mistake, say, for example, a fraud, if B cells the landto C, thattis a mistake. If C sells the land to D, that is a mistake, and if E mortgages the land to F, that isalso a mistake. The initial mistake ensures that some second transactions are also mistakes. Patel v Freddy’sand Gold Harp vMcCleod. However, thirdly and importantly, a mistake does not mean necessarily that the register will be changed. A mistake givesthe court or the registrar the opportunity to change the register, not the certainty, and Schedule 4 has developed rules. So, when there isa prejudicial mistake and the current registered proprietor is not in possession, the register will usually be changed. When there is one of these serious mistakes, but the current register proprietor is notin possession, the register will normally be changed. If, however, the current register proprieto possession and there has been one of these prejudicial mistakes, the register will not be changed Page8 of 10Fundamentals of Land Registration in England and Wales unless the current proprietor consents or the current proprietor is responsible for the mistake or it is unjust not to rectify. So, significant mistakes sometimes lead the register to be changed when the proprietor isnot in possession and sometimes lead the register not to be changed when the current proprietor isin possession, unless they consent its their fault or itis unjust. So, the existence ofa mistake gives no automatic right to change the register. It may do so, but it does not necessarily do so, and whether we change the register as a result of a mistake, may crucially depend upon whether the current proprietor isin possession. Importantly, as the last point makes clear on the slide, when the register is rectified or could have been and is not, the innocent party thereby prejudiced can get an indemnity from the land registry under Schedule 8. This is the insurance principal. if A's land is fraudulently taken by 8, who is registered, and B transfers the land to C, who is registered, A, the original owner, may want the land back. They will seek for the register to be changed. Ifthe new owner C is not in possession, the register is likely to be changed and C will get an indemnity, but A will get the land. lf however, Cis in possession, A will get an indemnity and C will keep the land. The answer is different depending on who is in possession. Slide 12 talks about the last important area in land registration, adverse possession under Schedule 6. As the slide makes clear, a major aim of the 2002 Act was to eliminate adverse possession of a registered ttle, This is because, under the Act, title is meant to be established by registration, not by any other means, Adverse possession is thus inconsistent with tite by registration. The fundamental point of the new system in Schedule 6s that no person can acquire title merely because of the passage of time, it does not matter how long a person is squatting on the land, they will not acquire title unless they are registered. As the third bullet point makes clear, an adverse possessor must apply to be registered if they want the title, and the title will not pass until such registration. Time itself does not give title. When the squatter or the adverse possessor applies for registration, the current paper owner, the registered proprietor, is notified of the application and may object and may proceed to evict the adverse possessor. The practical effects of these provisions, which are discussed in a little more detail on the last slide, is that adverse possession of a registered title under the 2002 Act, is extraordinarily difficult to achieve and may only occur in a number of limited circumstances. Slide 13, the last slide, talks about the adverse possession system ina little more detail and it outlines the steps that an adverse possessor must take if they are to have any chance of acqi title. ng First, the claimant (the squatter), must establish the factual basis of adverse possession according to the general law. These are the rules found in Pye vGraham which require the adverse possessor to demonstrate factual possession and an intention to possess. These are the same rules as existed under the old law. Secondly, the adverse possessor may apply fora title after 10 years adverse possession or at any time after that 10 years. They may apply after 10 years, after 15 years, or after 20 years, or anytime atall, but they do not get title unless they apply to be registered and that application is successful. As the third point makes clear on the slide, when the registered proprietor is alerted to the adverse possessor's application, and that will happen automatically, the registered proprietor has a choice. The registered proprietor is told about the adverse possessor'sapplication by the land registry. They can consent to the adverse possessor being registered, which is probably unusual, or they can dispute the facts. Page9 of 10Fundamentals of Land Registration in England and Wales However, very importantly, as the fourth bullet point makes clear, the registered proprietor may rely on the process in Schedule 6 This process gives the registered proprietor a further two years from the date of the application to evict the adverse possessor. The registered proprietor is alerted to the application and then gets two further years to evict the squatter. They get two years whether the squatter applies after 10 years or 30 years or 18 years, they always get the extra two years to evict the squatter. If they do not after two years, the squatter will be registered as title. But of course, most people will evict the squatter as soon as they are alertedto the application. Schedule 6 does, however, contain three exceptions, three circumstances when the adverse possessor will successfully get title. These are first in boundary di illustrated by Zarb v Parry. Secondly, when there is an estoppel. Thirdly, when the adverse possessor is entitled to the land for some other reason. These three exceptions are the only way that an adverse possessor can get title unless the registered owner fails toevict them after two years. Consequently, adverse possession is largely redundant in registered land. The only exception that is used and successful is the boundary dispute exception where the parties are arguing, for ‘example, over where the fence should go or where the wall should go or where the true boundary lies. In essence, the Land Registration Act, 2002, has achieved its aim of reducing adverse possession in registered title, Page 10 0f 10