I was wondering whether anyone could kindly shed a light on what this question entails... eg what do I need to include areas of land law etc ...
Jeffrey Marten is the owner of 29 Georgia Road, Georgetown. A copy of his title follows this question.
Jeffrey purchased the house in 2002. Three years later he married Alice, who moved into the property in 2005 and over the course of the next few years invested large amounts of her savings in renovating the property and converting the top floor into an apartment which the couple could rent out.
In 2010 Peter Taylor signed a lease agreement with Jeffrey, allowing him occupation of the top floor flat for five years. Peter travels a lot for business and so spends several months of the year away from home.
Jeffrey has recently found himself in financial difficulties and his marriage is coming under increasing strain. He has been thinking about selling up and moving away for some time and two weeks ago, whilst his wife was away visiting her elderly mother and Peter was on a business trip in America, he found a buyer, David Matthews, who was prepared to offer cash for a quick purchase.
If the sale goes through will Mr Matthews be bound by any interest that Alice or Peter have in the property?
Please explain your answer with reference to appropriate legal principles and authorities.
OFFICIAL COPY OF REGISTER ENTRIES
This official copy shows the entries subsisting on the register on 22 April 2013 at 10.31.45
This date must be quoted as the 'search from date' in any official search application based on this copy.
Under s.67 of the Land Registration Act 2002 this copy is admissible in evidence to the same extent as the original.
Issued on 22 April 2013 by HM Land Registry.
This title is administered by the Telford District Land Registry.
HM Land Registry
Title Number: HP98161
Edition Date: 10 July 1992
containing the description of the registered land and the estate comprised in the Title.
1.(10 July 2002) The Freehold land shown and edged with red on the Plan of the above Title filed at the Registry known as 29 Georgia Road, Georgetown.
stating nature of the title, name and address of the proprietor of the land and any entries affecting the right of disposal
1.(10th July 2002) Proprietor(s) : JEFFREY MARTEN of 29 Georgia Road, Georgetown
containing charges, incumbrances etc. adversely affecting the land
1.(10th July 1992) A conveyance of the land in this title and other land dated 29th September 1920 made between (1) Joseph James Lamont and Hugh Turner (Vendors) and (2) Clarence Taylor (Purchaser) contains the following covenant:
"The Purchaser for himself his heirs executors administrators and assigns hereby covenants with the Vendor his heirs and assigns for the benefit of the Vendor’s retained land and every part thereof that he will not erect or cause or permit to be erected on the land hereby conveyed any church chapel or other building of an ecclesiastical nature.”
NOTE: the Vendor’s retained land is to the west of the land in this Title.
2.(10th July 2002) REGISTERED CHARGE dated 20 July 2003 to secure the moneys including the further advances therein mentioned.
3.(10th July 2002) Proprietor(s): BARCLAYS BANK PLC of Barclays House Main Street Harlow Essex.
Land Law Plz Help Watch
- Thread Starter
- 11-04-2013 02:51
- 18-04-2013 22:52
i too am struggling have you had any leads?
- 01-05-2013 20:03
is it like overriding interests?
equitable leases as only 3 years so not legal by deed...?
- 01-05-2013 20:04
- 10-05-2013 20:21
In both cases, work out what rights they may have and then if their rights take priority on sale.
[Sale at undervalue is irrelevant].
You need to determine whether Alice has acquired an interest under a constructive trust. Contributions to renonvation will do this
(Stack v Dowden). She hasn't protected as a minor interest so need to consider if overrides under schedule 3, par 2 of the LRA 2002. She has an interest which can override (Boland, Flegg) but need to consider if in occupation. Temporary absence is o.k. so long as she intends to return. Is her occupation obvious on a reasonably careful inspection of the land? If not, will loose overriding status.
The lease - if legal. Overrides as a legal lease - schedule 3, para 1 - legal lease not exceeding 7 years. Occupation is irrelevant.
However, if not legal (i.e. no deed) , it can be equitable (in writing and signed - LP(MP) Act 1989 and Walsh v Longsdale) ). Consider if can override under Schedule 3, para 2 again.
- 11-05-2013 08:09
Geary v Rankine  EWCA Civ 555 provides an example of the CA ignoring Rosset in a sole legal owner case, applying the approach at the end of Lord Walker and Lady Hale's joint judgment in Kernott. The case is in some ways factually similar to this question, in that the wife moved in after the building was acquired.
I think we can probably infer an intent here on the evidence, disregarding Rosset and taking the liberal not-really-inference approach to 'inference' used in Kernott.
edit: Sorry -- can't sleep, so jumping at an opportunity to feel like I'm doing work.Last edited by TimmonaPortella; 11-05-2013 at 08:20.