Land Law Assessment

[Name of Author]

[Name of Institution]
 2

Land Law Assessment

Part A

For part A, question 1 has been selected. To provide the legal advice to Alison, IRAC

method will be used.

Issues

The key issues identified in the case scenario provided are mentioned as follows.

 Whether Alison owes any rights to other parties related to the registered land that she

purchased?

 Whether such rights can be protected?

 Whether new purchaser of the property might be legally bound by such rights?

Rules and Application

As it is known that the registered land refers to the land transferred to the land register

and the register of rights. Secondly, someone has property rights. Land ownership is the

ownership of land for a limited time. This is the case in the UK legal law. On the other hand,

other immovable property rights are also referred in land law. The issues that are identified in the

above section can be analysed through provisions found in section 29 of the LRA 2002.1 Under

current rules, the restrictions that apply to high-priced property ownership of registered property

include the restriction or interests of protected rights in the register, registration fee or complete

interest by registration.2 It could be stated that Alison being the seller of the property made the

1
s29 of the LRA 2002
2
Ibid.
 3

purchase of the registered through registration. It therefore binds the rights of third parties. The

rights of all the concerned parties including Barbara and Enid are discussed below.

As Barbara paid a certain amount of price, therefore, it was her right to get the share in

the property, but as per the facts of the case, there has been no information available on her

name’s listing in the registration of the property. Given the facts presented, it is not clear whether

the donation is a loan or a donation or participation in a partner. If the money purchased is paid

for by two or more parties on an equity basis and the assets are on behalf of one party, the capital

gains positive trust from the other party. The trust is activated when the cancellation of the fund's

financial interests is incomplete.3 On the other hand, if the purchase money is given in the form

of loans or grants, there can be no speculation about trust. So if the credit or gift has not been

paid in this case, it can be said that Alison may be involved. It must also be denied that trust

derives from the proof of the relationship between the parties.4

The problem is that Alison stayed home with her sister Edin until she decided to sell the

house. It can be argued that the interests of persons living in real estate may be binding on the

buyer (under certain conditions), even if those interests are not registered. There is no specific

definition for the actual position. The truth is that, according to case law, there must be some real

rights, not laws. This ensures consistency and consistency. Therefore, based on the above points

and the conditions below, it could be stated that can say that Barbara is engaged in real life. 5

Notification and mandatory restrictions apply when recording the price of land registered.

It has been clearly stated under LRA 2002 that a person's interest in the actual occupation of land

includes rights and actual occupation.6 So if it prevents Barbara’s interests, it would eventually

3
See Dyer v Dyer (1788) 2 Cox Eq Cas 92
4
Buffery v Buffery [1988] 2 F.L.R. 365
5
See Williams & Glyn's Bank Ltd v Boland [1981] A.C. 487; Abbey National Building Society v Cann [1990]
UKHL 3; Lloyds Bank v Rosset [1989] Ch 350; Chhokar v Chhokar [1984] FLR 313.
6
Para 2, Sch. 3 of LRA 2002
 4

reduce Alison’s interests in the property. It should be noted that if the buyer asks with interest

about the land benefits before buying the land, he will not find it useful. If it is probable that it

will express benefits. The benefits offered by the owner are not violated. Alison did not mention

this when asked if she could inspect the home before buying.

Enid's rights: She has a room, she lives at least two months a year, and the room has been

renovated. He was also given the first right to deny. It is known that action has a broad

definition. Pre-emption refers to the behavior of others related to the pre-emption right. More

specifically, the first right of refusal is the right to purchase a specific property from another

person. The right to buy property belonging to another person is usually called the right of

refusal in the first place. Enid also granted the prescribed rights. This is a real estate contract.

Rights under section 33 of the LRA 2002 may be protected by prior notice or restriction

of recording.7 Potential buyers will not be restricted without notice. As per the case law stated in

Midland Bank Trust Co Ltd v Green,8 the court would not check whether Enid's benefits were

recognized. If her right is not registered, then it could be stated that it would be deemed that she

is not legally bound to have any interests in Alison’s property. Another way to enter user benefits

based on registration administrations is to use restrictions. Enid's restrictions are unclear at this

point.

For this reason, it can be said that Enid is not connected without restrictions. The

question is whether the short deadline (two months) and the antenna of the Ante clothes and

things can interfere with the real effort. The law does not state that a person should not have a

physical presence, but should not live or work there. Certainly, an appellant should not be treated

personally on appeal. One can think of Enid as a real short-term career. It is not clear if Alison

7
s33 of LRA 2002
8
(No. 1) [1981] A.C. 513
 5

would control the house, therefore, if Enid can prove her core interests, she can minimize

Alison's interests.

Besides, it can be stated that Dev’s right in the property could be determined by

considering the point that he was allowed to use the shed at the rear of Sleepy Hollow during the

winter. Therefore, it creates the right to use something in someone else's land. 9 Further, there is

right of way,10 and right to storage11 can be facilitated in many ways. In this case, it is a

transparent subsidy. The contract expired for five years. This is the legal convenience of the

agreement. Pursuant to section (1)(a) of Law of Property Act 1925 (LPA),12 the option is revoked

and the purchaser of the property is prohibited if the exemption is lawful. Similarly, under

section 3 of LRA 2002,13 the legal simplifications apply to purchasers only in the following cases

and require costly consideration.

1. The purchased property has been registered as per Commons Registration Act 1965; or

2. The buyer has the awareness regarding the property’ purchase; or

3. For inspecting the land in a reasonable and careful manner, easement would be necessary;

4. It has been utilized in a year prior to the disposition.

Therefore, if easement has not been maintained, it is not in Dev’s interest. Similarly, it is

not clear whether he knew or examined the house before buying it. Therefore, if a person do not

exceed the above limit, it does not depend on Dev's interests. If the legal rental period is less than

three years, Alison need to register or use the notice for security reasons. The establishment or

transfer of legal rights should outweigh the benefits specified in the contract. Pursuant to section

54 (2) of LPA,14 it is not necessary to enter into a short-term contractual lease agreement. Leases
9
See Kelk v Pearson (1871) LR 6 Ch App 809, 811
10
Borman v Griffith [1930] 1 Ch 493
11
Wright v Macadam [1949] KB 744
12
s(1)(a) of Law of Property Act 1925 (LPA)
13
s3 of LRA 2002
14
s54 (2) of LPA
 6

are short-term, oral and urgent. Therefore, it can be said that Alison is related to the parties

concerned. From the aforementioned discussion, it could be ascertained that the rights of Barbara

and other parties mainly depend on the property’s registration, however, it cannot be stated that

Enid’s rights do not depend on Alison.

Conclusion

In conclusion, it could be stated that Alison owes the rights to other parties related to the

registered land that she purchased and she has to ensure that all the rights are provided to the

parties. If she fails to provide such rights, she will have to face liabilities under the enforced land

laws. It can also be concluded that the rights of the parties are protected under the relevant

statutory and case laws that are discussed in above sections. As far as the purchaser’s legally

binding relation is concerned, it can be concluded that the new purchaser can rely on the

provisions and case laws that are discussed and applied in the aforementioned section.

Part B

Issues

The main issues identified in the case scenario are that whether Andy can sell the

property free of the interests of the other parties or not. Another issue is whether or not a future

purchaser would be bound by any of the agreements he made.

Rules and Application

The aim for Land Registration Act 2002 is to completely change property rights in the

United Kingdom and Wales and to modernize the land register system. The owners of the

exchanged property want security easily and the buyers want to get rid of these rights. The Law
 7

of Property Act 1925 provided protection by codifying and simplifying existing laws and

establishing a new land system to protect purchasers and third-party owners. Section 2 of LPA

1925 proposes a limited process that changes the creditor's equal interest in selling the

custodian's property, thereby protecting the purchaser of the deposited property purchased for at

least two trustees.

The section 198(1) of the Law of Property Act 1925 (LPA 1925) requires the registration

of land interests and provides buyers with an easier way to identify potential commissions and

protect third parties through guarantees.15 However, not all rights and benefits should be

considered as land. Anyone who buys legal property from unregistered land places it on the basis

of all other legal property and rights and pursues the equal interests of their knowledge. Or

message (true, suspicious or suspicious). Therefore, buyers should do the following searches and

inquiries to protect themselves.

As per section 198 (1) of the Law of Property Act 1925 (LPA 1925), registration is a real

declaration of benefits and the buyer must pay automatically. 16 Under section 199 (1) (i), interest

may be posted,17 but further notices will not affect the buyer if he is not actually on the list. Even

if he knows its importance, he will be released from the purchase. Therefore, in Midland Bank

Trust Co Ltd v Green,18 a third party is liable for his interests as protected by registration. Even if

the buyer knew that commissions existed.

Secondly, during the landlord's tenure, the landlord searches for the landlord's name

because the property name is not the property's address, but is registered at the time the fee is

created. As per case law stated in Oak Co-operative Building Society v Blackburn,19 it can be as

15
s198(1) of the Law of Property Act 1925
16
s198 (1) of Law of Property Act 1925
17
s199 (1) (i) of Law of Property Act 1925
18
(No. 1) [1981] 1 AC 513
19
[1968] Ch 730 CA
 8

difficult as recording the wrong version of a person's name, assuming the full name of the

property owner who registered it is incorrect. For buyers who do not read everything or are

looking for the wrong name.

Further, in Diligent Finance v Alleyne,20 the use of the list of false names does not depend

on a third party. With a good history of at least 15 years, this means that the buyer may have the

unattended name of the previous owner who registered it. The land is responsible because no

prior agreement is required.21 However, section 25 provides that the purchaser may be

compensated in the event of damage in that situation.22 It should be noted that this is not a serious

problem as no allegations have been made. Thirdly, ownership actions involving the seller must

be fully justified, starting with the underlying assets, as equal rights holders record their rights on

an invoice which is taken care of by the buyers. As per case law stated in Worthington v

Morgan,23 the purchaser is responsible for all rights discovered during the inspection. Further,

this right was not inquired about and is deemed to have been notified by the purchaser.

Lastly, the buyer must arrange for the property to be inspected with a reasonable response

from the dealer. This point was provided by the court in Hunt v Luck.24 The decision in this case

shows the risk that an unregistered buyer of real estate would consider the right of appeal in any

appeal without examining that person. It is clear that taking informal action on this subject can

cause many problems and lead to stress and significant activity. Therefore, compulsory

registration for a degree is a major step forward. However, the original structure established by

the LRA 1925 was intact and included a negotiating document proposing to replace the current

law. The LRA 2002 aims to simplify and streamline the transfer process while improving the

20
(1972) 23 P & CR 346
21
See s198(1) of LPA 1925
22
s25 of LPA 1925
23
(1849) 16 Sim 547
24
[1902] 1 Ch. 428
 9

security of buyers, sellers and all relevant third party interests. It aims to create a truly

transparent, accurate and comprehensive list, which will further support a development system

that allows the sale of registered land to be processed electronically.

Under section 70 (1) of the LPA 1925,25 reasonable and prudent purchasers do not register

an informal purchase of land through productive and constructive trusts and exclusive liens even

after the necessary searches. These rights are not easy to find, but they are still the property of

the disc and subsequent ownership. These interests are involved in many cases, some of them

have been discussed by the House of Lords in Pettitt v Pettitt.26 It was ruled in this case that

allies can benefit economically from the legal property of others. Further, in Williams & Glyn's

Bank v Boland,27 the court found that the rights of the beneficiary in a trust depend on the buyer

in the actual complaint. Besides, in Strand Securities v Caswell,28 the court argued that an

occupied person can be enjoyed only if his or her rights are known in law or rights and if the

person is his or her true profession.

The Court of Appeal in Thatcher v Douglas & Anor29 found that under section 70(1)(a) of

LPA 1925,30 the seller’s primary interest was reasonable easement. Notwithstanding, it was stated

in Celsteel Ltd v Alton House Holdings Ltd 31 that certain reasonable interests harm interests.

Another important case law was established in Webb v Pollmount Ltd32and the court stated that

any right of ownership is an overriding interest as long as the owner has land rights at the

relevant time.33 It is clear that, according to the problems associated with these decisions, the

25
s70 (1) of LPA 1925
26
[1970] AC 777, HL
27
[1981] AC 487
28
[1965] Ch 958
29
[1995] NPC 206
30
S70(1)(a) of LPA 1925
31
[1985] 1 W.L.R. 204
32
[1966] Ch 584
33
s70(1) (g) of LRA 1925
 10

breach of interest is not the only secondary liability. Their existence also means that absolute

degrees cannot be completed. It is worth noting that the existence of third - party rights, which

cannot be easily identified, seriously undermines the overall system of interpretation offered by

the negotiating document.

As per paragraph 2, Schedule 3 of LRA 2002, the parties in any position must not have

interest to the purchased land. If the applicant is examined before the sale is made and does not

show an interest in a reasonable expectation or if the application is not clear under reasonable

conditions, the interest shall not be protected. It is important for the purchaser to consider the

land carefully to see if anyone who claims to own the land and/or the owner of the registered

owner understands the rights. Further, this means prior control and the buyer is responsible for

handing it over to the actual owners of the buildings, instead of avoiding any interest. However,

the tenant is obliged to express his/her interests if necessary, otherwise the right to claim large

compensation is lost. Thus, there is a balance between buyer and tenant.

Third Party Rights

Among the various advantages of other owned or other owned lands, the main features of

builders are simple and limited contracts. However, before purchasing a site, care should be

taken with licensing and rental, closure, negative ownership, or other actions that may interfere

with the new owner. As per case law stated in Midland Bank Trust Co. v Green, the Land

Charges Act 1972 allows a third party to register a fair benefit, which means that the purchaser is

subject to prior notice.

A land use permit can be created by obtaining a legal permit for land that does not have

large plots of land, so that savings cannot simply be made. It is considered a legitimate interest of
 11

the state and will be merged with a new owner in the future. English law usually imposes

contractual obligations on a contract of sale. Such special site inspections affect the continued

use of the property. Control contracts are considered contract restrictions and can be applied to

specific land developments or sub-items. The use of land during the construction phase or after

the completion of the project affects the residential area, the special needs of local people, the

road development project or the interests of visitors. Therefore, the rights of third parties should

be carefully examined before the tender procedure. Put a responsibility on the developer that

could affect the value of the land.

Conclusion

In conclusion, it can be stated that Andy cannot sell the property free of the interests of

the other parties because he has agreed at a certain price for which the parties are living in his 24

Kitty Corner, four-storey townhouse. Further, it can be concluded that the future purchaser

would be bound by any of the agreements he made because he/she has to be careful and ensure

that all the aforementioned points discussed prior to purchase of the registered land are

considered.
 12

Bibliography

Cases

Abbey National Building Society v Cann [1990] UKHL 3

Borman v Griffith [1930] 1 Ch 493

Buffery v Buffery [1988] 2 F.L.R. 365

Celsteel Ltd v Alton House Holdings Ltd [1985] 1 W.L.R. 204

Chhokar v Chhokar [1984] FLR 313

Diligent Finance v Alleyne (1972) 23 P & CR 346

Dyer v Dyer (1788) 2 Cox Eq Cas 92

Hunt v Luck [1902] 1 Ch. 428

Kelk v Pearson (1871) LR 6 Ch App 809, 811

Lloyds Bank v Rosset [1989] Ch 350

Midland Bank Trust Co Ltd v Green (No. 1) [1981] 1 AC 513

Oak Co-operative Building Society v Blackburn [1968] Ch 730 CA

Pettitt v Pettitt [1970] AC 777, HL.

Strand Securities v Caswell [1965] Ch 958

Thatcher v Douglas & Anor [1995] NPC 206

Webb v Pollmount Ltd [1966] Ch 584

Williams & Glyn's Bank Ltd v Boland [1981] A.C. 487

Worthington v Morgan (1849) 16 Sim 547

Wright v Macadam [1949] KB 744

Legislation

Land Registration Act 2002

Law of Property Act 1925