Unregistered Land
- Why was the land charges system introduced in 1925?
- They wanted to make it quicker to convey land; cheaper to convey land; and safer to convey land, as buyers knew what they were buying.
- What is the continued relevance, if any, of the doctrine of notice in unregistered land?
- Equitable interests which are neither overreachable nor registrable are subject to the doctrine of notice.
- What is the effect of a correctly registered land charge upon third party transferees of the land concerned?
- What is the effect of failure to register a registrable interest as a land charge?
- Summarise the reasoning of Lord Denning in the Court of Appeal and Lord Wilberforce in the House of Lords in Midland Bank Trust Co Ltd v Green.
- In particular, explain their different interpretations of the words 'purchaser of a legal estate for money or money's worth' in s13(2) LCA 1925 (now s4(6) LCA 1972).
- Which interpretation do you think is preferable?
- The term is used to refer to situations where the legal freehold estate has not been registered.
- The only type of legal freehold estate that can exist after 1925 is a fee simple absolute in possession.
- Title deeds are a bundle of documents which are a collection of all deeds executed in relation to that piece of land.
- You can't create/transfer a legal interest without a deed.
- Unregistered land is being replaced by registered land where the fee simple is on a register.
- Not only is the title on the register, but also any other rights over the land.
- 1925: System of compulsory land registration was introduced.
- It's compulsory to register only if certain events occur (triggering events).
- It's taken a very long time to make all land registered.
- 10% of fee simples are unregistered: 25% of the geographical area.
- These tend to be large estates owned by companies like Universities, Churches, etc. where ownership rarely changes hands.
- In 1925, there were 6 statutes regarding land ownership.
- The aim of the reforms were to make it quicker to convey land; cheaper to convey land; and safer to convey land, as they knew what they were buying.
- Land Registration Act 1925 brought compulsory registration.
- It was anticipated that it would take a long time.
- As well as requiring compulsory registration of title, they made measures to improve conveyancing in unregistered land for as long as it existed.
- Land Charges Act 1925 (now 1972): the land charges register registers unregistered land, keeping record of special types of interest.
- You need to decide which category your interest falls into.
- Legal interests: These bind purchasers automatically (apart from 'puisne morgages'). These must be registered as land charges to be binding.
- Equitable interests registrable as land charges:
- Equitable interests which are overreachable (equitable interests under trusts): For overreaching to occur, there has to be two legal owners - two legal trustees. The interest has to be capable of being overreached. You'd have to show you're acting in good faith; have no actual, constructive, or imputed notice;
- Equitable interests which are neither overreachable nor registrable as land charges: There aren't many of these. They are subject to the doctrine of notice - Shiloh Spinners v Harding 1973. Examples include restrictive covenants created before 1926.
- Caunce v Caunce: Husband was the sole legal owner but held it on trust for him and his wife. He mortgaged the property (type of conveyance). He wasn't able to pay back the loan. Was the bank bound by the wife's interest? The bank wasn't bound; it didn't have notice of her interest; it was Equity's darling; although the bank knew she existed, she was 'wholly consistent' with her husband's interests. Judge said it didn't just apply to wives. If there's no obligation to check with a spouse whether they have an interest in the land, it gives very little protection for spouses for their spouse's actions. This has never been technically overruled.
- Kings North Trust v Tizzard: Husband was the sole legal owner, but held it on trust for him and his wife, who had contributed to the purchase price. The H and W split up. The W had moved out but lived very nearby. She went into the house every day and left a lot of her stuff in the house. When her husband was away she stayed over. The bank had visited the house at a time agreed by the husband. The W wasn't there. The H told the bank that she didn't live there anymore. The mortgage went through. The H emigrated with his son. He hadn't told his wife that he was mortgaging the property. It was held that the bank was bound as they had constructive notice of the wife's right because once the H informed them he had a wife, the bank should've made enquiries on whether there was an interest.