Final Word Count: 2465
Essay Tittle:
Question:
‘When parties engage in a property transaction, it is essential that they obtain
legally reliable information regarding the actual property involved in the trans-
action. The availability of information on the property – as well as its owners
or creditors – helps to eliminate uncertainty over property rights or obligations
that may encumber the property. In the absence of any public records or any
related rights to a property, the transaction costs can become overwhelming,
risking that ownership becomes untraceable’
World Bank Group, Doing Business 2018: Reforming to Create Jobs (October
2018) In light of this statement – please address the following 3 questions:
1. 1) To what extent does HM Land Registry and the Land Register in
particular, afford parties legally reliable information that negates the
need for them to have to undertake other enquiries?
2. 2) Were the changes brought about by the Land Registration Act 2002
effective in eliminating uncertainty over property rights or obligations
that may encumber a property?
3. 3) To what extent is the Government’s intention of completing the
Land Register by 2030 realistic, and what changes need to occur to
meet this deadline?
Firstly this essay will argue that the Land Register does not provide a buyer
with reliable information precluding the need for further enquiries; secondly
that the effectiveness of the Land Registration Act 2002 (LRA 2002) was
limited in eliminating uncertainty over encumbrances. Thirdly, the
, implementation of a full e-conveyance system soon is unrealistic, and the
Land Register will remain incomplete by 2030.
1. The Register does not provide full information precluding the undertaking of
other enquiries for potential purchasers. Although it discloses titles such as
ownership and, prima facie, purchasers can assume that the legal owner’s
power of sale is unfettered in the absence of any other entries on the register
that curtail that power,1 this is not absolute. The alteration provisions under
Schedule 4 LRA 2002 allow for changes to the Register to rectify mistakes,
including ownership of the land where the wrong owner is registered. This
creates tensions between the purported aims of the LRA to reflect a true
image of land rights,2 and instil confidence in the purchaser by allowing
rectification to guarantee title. 3 The Court of Appeal demonstrated this
tension in Gold Harp,4 where it allowed rectification of two leasehold titles,
demonstrating that the court is fully prepared to utilise the LRA provisions to
compromise the certainty of registered title. Although indemnification can
preclude financial loss in instances where rectification takes place, this does
not provide consolation to purchasers who lose potentially valuable
investments.
The system of overriding interests under the LRA 1925 and 2002 allows for
the omission of specific encumbrances from the Register; overriding first
registration or dispositions; and necessitating further enquiries.5 As Dixon
1 Charles Harpum, Stuart Bridge, Martin Dixon, Megarry & Wade: The Law of Real Property
(8th edn, Sweet & Maxwell, 2012) 7-001
2 i.e. the “Mirror principle”
3 Amy Goymour, 'Resolving the tensions between the Land Registration Act 2002's 'priority'
and 'alteration' provisions (2015) 3, Conveyancer and Property Lawyer, 253-266, 254, 266
4 Gold Harp Properties v McLeod [2014] EWCA Civ 1084
5 Harpum, Bridge, Dixon, op. cit. 7-001
Essay Tittle:
Question:
‘When parties engage in a property transaction, it is essential that they obtain
legally reliable information regarding the actual property involved in the trans-
action. The availability of information on the property – as well as its owners
or creditors – helps to eliminate uncertainty over property rights or obligations
that may encumber the property. In the absence of any public records or any
related rights to a property, the transaction costs can become overwhelming,
risking that ownership becomes untraceable’
World Bank Group, Doing Business 2018: Reforming to Create Jobs (October
2018) In light of this statement – please address the following 3 questions:
1. 1) To what extent does HM Land Registry and the Land Register in
particular, afford parties legally reliable information that negates the
need for them to have to undertake other enquiries?
2. 2) Were the changes brought about by the Land Registration Act 2002
effective in eliminating uncertainty over property rights or obligations
that may encumber a property?
3. 3) To what extent is the Government’s intention of completing the
Land Register by 2030 realistic, and what changes need to occur to
meet this deadline?
Firstly this essay will argue that the Land Register does not provide a buyer
with reliable information precluding the need for further enquiries; secondly
that the effectiveness of the Land Registration Act 2002 (LRA 2002) was
limited in eliminating uncertainty over encumbrances. Thirdly, the
, implementation of a full e-conveyance system soon is unrealistic, and the
Land Register will remain incomplete by 2030.
1. The Register does not provide full information precluding the undertaking of
other enquiries for potential purchasers. Although it discloses titles such as
ownership and, prima facie, purchasers can assume that the legal owner’s
power of sale is unfettered in the absence of any other entries on the register
that curtail that power,1 this is not absolute. The alteration provisions under
Schedule 4 LRA 2002 allow for changes to the Register to rectify mistakes,
including ownership of the land where the wrong owner is registered. This
creates tensions between the purported aims of the LRA to reflect a true
image of land rights,2 and instil confidence in the purchaser by allowing
rectification to guarantee title. 3 The Court of Appeal demonstrated this
tension in Gold Harp,4 where it allowed rectification of two leasehold titles,
demonstrating that the court is fully prepared to utilise the LRA provisions to
compromise the certainty of registered title. Although indemnification can
preclude financial loss in instances where rectification takes place, this does
not provide consolation to purchasers who lose potentially valuable
investments.
The system of overriding interests under the LRA 1925 and 2002 allows for
the omission of specific encumbrances from the Register; overriding first
registration or dispositions; and necessitating further enquiries.5 As Dixon
1 Charles Harpum, Stuart Bridge, Martin Dixon, Megarry & Wade: The Law of Real Property
(8th edn, Sweet & Maxwell, 2012) 7-001
2 i.e. the “Mirror principle”
3 Amy Goymour, 'Resolving the tensions between the Land Registration Act 2002's 'priority'
and 'alteration' provisions (2015) 3, Conveyancer and Property Lawyer, 253-266, 254, 266
4 Gold Harp Properties v McLeod [2014] EWCA Civ 1084
5 Harpum, Bridge, Dixon, op. cit. 7-001
