Land Law New Exam With Questions And Correct Answers
100% Verified Latest Update (everything you need about
land law is here) A+ Graded
A client has entered into a contract to purchase a house. After exchange of contracts,
the client seeks your advice about whether the seller must leave the built in oven and
inset hob both made by the same high end manufacturer as part of an expensive modern
kitchen. The items are not mentioned in the contract.
May the seller remove the items before completion?
a) Yes, because the items are likely to be fixtures due to the high degree of annexation.
b) Yes, because the items are likely to be chattels due to the slight degree of annexation.
c) Yes, because the items are the seller's personal property and always removable.
d) No, because removal of the items would render the room unfit for use as a kitchen
and appear to have been affixed to the overall design in the kitchen.
e) No, because anything within a property is part of the land in perpetuity and cannot be
taken.
D is correct. Even though the items might have been removed without great damage, it
is not known whether they are of standard size or easy to replace.
Once removed, the oven and hob could not be used without similar cabinets to house
them and the items appear to form part of the overall design of the kitchen. Hence the
purpose of annexation is for the better enjoyment of the land and not the items. The
items are therefore fixtures.
,Options A and B are not the best answers as they only consider the first element of the
two stage test (the degree of annexation).
Options C and E are wrong as neither answer reflects the two stage test.
A freehold owner sells part of their land. Within the transfer (by deed) the buyer
promises to use the land for agricultural purposes only.
Which of the following answers best describes the interest that has been created?
a) It is a restrictive covenant which is legal as it has been created by deed.
b) It is a restrictive covenant which is not capable of being a legal interest.
c) It is a legal easement as it has been made by deed.
d) It is a restrictive covenant which is capable of being a legal interest.
e) It is a restrictive covenant and must be created by deed in order to take effect at law.
B is correct. A restrictive covenant does not appear in either section 1(1) or section 1(2)
of the Law of Property Act 1925 and is therefore not capable of being legal (section 1(3)
of the LPA 1925). The required formality for the creation of a restrictive covenant is in
writing and signed (section 53 of the LPA 1925). A deed more than meets this
requirement.
Options A, D and E are incorrect. The fact that a restrictive covenant is created by deed
does not make it any less equitable in nature.
Option C is incorrect. This is a restrictive covenant, i.e. a promise by one landowner in
,favour of another landowner that they will not do certain things on the land.
The freehold owner granted a three year lease to a tenant by deed in return for a one off
payment of £30,000. The tenant discovered that the freehold owner's signature had not
been witnessed.
What interest has been created?
a) An equitable lease.
b) A legal lease.
c) A legal easement.
d) A legal parol lease.
e) An equitable easement.
A is correct. The facts state that a lease has been created (and so Options C and E are
wrong). A lease is capable of being legal (section 1(1)(a) of the Law of Property Act
1925). A deed is normally required to create a legal lease (section 52(1) of the LPA
1925). A deed must meet the requirements of section 1 of the Law of Property
(Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989. The deed fails this as the freehold owner's
signature had not been witnessed (and so Option B is wrong).
There is an exception the the rule that a deed is required to create a legal lease - the
parol lease exception. However this will not apply here as one of the requirements - that
there should be no fine or premium is not met as there is a premium £30,000 one-off
payment and so Option D is wrong.
, The lease will, therefore, be equitable since it seems to satisfy the provisions of section
2 of the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989.
The freehold owner granted their neighbour (by deed) the right to use the drain running
beneath the freehold owner's land to the neighbour's land for a period of 20 years.
Which of the following best describes the interest that has been created?
a) An equitable lease.
b) An equitable easement.
c) A licence.
d) A restrictive covenant.
e) A legal easement.
E is correct. This is an easement – a right for one landowner to make use of another
parcel of land for the benefit of their own land. An easement is capable of being legal
provided it meets the criteria set out in section 1(2)(a) of the Law of Property 1925. It
must last forever or a fixed duration. Twenty years is a fixed duration. In order to be
legal, an easement must be created by deed (section 52(1) of the LPA 1925) which is the
case here. This is, therefore, a legal easement.
Options A, C and D are incorrect. An easement has been created.
Option B is incorrect. A legal easement has been created as the easement is capable of
being legal and was created by deed.
On the sale of unregistered land the seller must prove his title by producing title deeds
to the property proving ownership of the land for at least five years.
100% Verified Latest Update (everything you need about
land law is here) A+ Graded
A client has entered into a contract to purchase a house. After exchange of contracts,
the client seeks your advice about whether the seller must leave the built in oven and
inset hob both made by the same high end manufacturer as part of an expensive modern
kitchen. The items are not mentioned in the contract.
May the seller remove the items before completion?
a) Yes, because the items are likely to be fixtures due to the high degree of annexation.
b) Yes, because the items are likely to be chattels due to the slight degree of annexation.
c) Yes, because the items are the seller's personal property and always removable.
d) No, because removal of the items would render the room unfit for use as a kitchen
and appear to have been affixed to the overall design in the kitchen.
e) No, because anything within a property is part of the land in perpetuity and cannot be
taken.
D is correct. Even though the items might have been removed without great damage, it
is not known whether they are of standard size or easy to replace.
Once removed, the oven and hob could not be used without similar cabinets to house
them and the items appear to form part of the overall design of the kitchen. Hence the
purpose of annexation is for the better enjoyment of the land and not the items. The
items are therefore fixtures.
,Options A and B are not the best answers as they only consider the first element of the
two stage test (the degree of annexation).
Options C and E are wrong as neither answer reflects the two stage test.
A freehold owner sells part of their land. Within the transfer (by deed) the buyer
promises to use the land for agricultural purposes only.
Which of the following answers best describes the interest that has been created?
a) It is a restrictive covenant which is legal as it has been created by deed.
b) It is a restrictive covenant which is not capable of being a legal interest.
c) It is a legal easement as it has been made by deed.
d) It is a restrictive covenant which is capable of being a legal interest.
e) It is a restrictive covenant and must be created by deed in order to take effect at law.
B is correct. A restrictive covenant does not appear in either section 1(1) or section 1(2)
of the Law of Property Act 1925 and is therefore not capable of being legal (section 1(3)
of the LPA 1925). The required formality for the creation of a restrictive covenant is in
writing and signed (section 53 of the LPA 1925). A deed more than meets this
requirement.
Options A, D and E are incorrect. The fact that a restrictive covenant is created by deed
does not make it any less equitable in nature.
Option C is incorrect. This is a restrictive covenant, i.e. a promise by one landowner in
,favour of another landowner that they will not do certain things on the land.
The freehold owner granted a three year lease to a tenant by deed in return for a one off
payment of £30,000. The tenant discovered that the freehold owner's signature had not
been witnessed.
What interest has been created?
a) An equitable lease.
b) A legal lease.
c) A legal easement.
d) A legal parol lease.
e) An equitable easement.
A is correct. The facts state that a lease has been created (and so Options C and E are
wrong). A lease is capable of being legal (section 1(1)(a) of the Law of Property Act
1925). A deed is normally required to create a legal lease (section 52(1) of the LPA
1925). A deed must meet the requirements of section 1 of the Law of Property
(Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989. The deed fails this as the freehold owner's
signature had not been witnessed (and so Option B is wrong).
There is an exception the the rule that a deed is required to create a legal lease - the
parol lease exception. However this will not apply here as one of the requirements - that
there should be no fine or premium is not met as there is a premium £30,000 one-off
payment and so Option D is wrong.
, The lease will, therefore, be equitable since it seems to satisfy the provisions of section
2 of the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989.
The freehold owner granted their neighbour (by deed) the right to use the drain running
beneath the freehold owner's land to the neighbour's land for a period of 20 years.
Which of the following best describes the interest that has been created?
a) An equitable lease.
b) An equitable easement.
c) A licence.
d) A restrictive covenant.
e) A legal easement.
E is correct. This is an easement – a right for one landowner to make use of another
parcel of land for the benefit of their own land. An easement is capable of being legal
provided it meets the criteria set out in section 1(2)(a) of the Law of Property 1925. It
must last forever or a fixed duration. Twenty years is a fixed duration. In order to be
legal, an easement must be created by deed (section 52(1) of the LPA 1925) which is the
case here. This is, therefore, a legal easement.
Options A, C and D are incorrect. An easement has been created.
Option B is incorrect. A legal easement has been created as the easement is capable of
being legal and was created by deed.
On the sale of unregistered land the seller must prove his title by producing title deeds
to the property proving ownership of the land for at least five years.
