1.
Doctrine of notice
LPA came into effect in 1925
Legal interests will bind the world, any purchaser of land would be
bound by any legal interests in the land
Easements are capable of being legal
Trusts, restricted covenants can only exist in equity, not capable of
being legal
Equity’s darling
Not bound by equitable interests
Equity does not touch you
You have checked physically
Risk to equitable owner and risk to purchaser. Purchaser doesn’t do
what their meant to do means they are not equity’s darling
Would a reasonable person have asked?
Land charges act deals with not registered lands, equitable interests
are covered by these acts.
Identifying equitable interests
Family interests cannot be compensated by compensations - special
protection
Commercial interests can be compensated by money
Trusts cannot be compensated by money
Midland Bank v Green [1981]
Entered into contract, father and son fell out so father sold land to
wife. Was he bound to contract?
In registered land you can put in A notice or overriding interests s70
LRA25 now LRA02
Trusts interests
You can overreach a trust interest which applies to
registered/unregistered land
If you're a purchaser s2 & 27 LPA, if you pay purchase money to, 2
or more trustees (legal owners) then as the purchaser you will not
be bound by a trust. Beneficial interest is now in the money you
paid for the property not in the home
(City of London v Flegg)
Legal title owners were the young couple, the beneficial interest was
all 4. young couple mortgaged the property, and the city of London
wanted their property back and the parents said we have a
beneficial interest.
Flegg’s had a remedy against the young couple. Purchaser had
overreached the trust interest so they could ignore. They paid
purchase money to 2 trustees.
Court said remedy for the Flegg’s is to go after the younger couple
If you don’t overreach in unregistered land, are you equity’s darling?
A person acquires a legal estate absolutely if they are a bona fide
purchaser, for value, without notice
Kingsnorth v Tizard
Some evidence of physical presence
1
, They didn’t ask, failure to ask meant that the bank had imputed
notice
Building society held that property on trust for themselves, and Ms
Tizzard.
Consequences of this is that they had no remedy which is the
danger of not overreaching.
Bank had purchased the legal title, but he could not sell what he
didn’t own (NEMO DAT)
They took subject to the rights which Mr Tizzard had been bound
If NOT overreached
If land is registered there is no doctrine of notice
Doctrine doesn’t apply
Interest may be over-riding (when interest in a land will bind a
purchaser)
Overreaching is when purchaser ignores trust interests because
they have paid purchase money to 2 or more trustees
2
, 2. Interests in Unregistered Land
Overreaching
Over-reachable interest
Beneficial interest behind a trust
Won’t apply if you inherit a property or its gifted to you. You have to
have paid over some money
Trusts interests can be over-reached (s2 LPA) - over-reachable
interests
Beneficial interest in the land has been transferred to the purchase
money
If property is overreached your beneficial interests moves to the
money
Property right is the beneficial interest
Two or more trustees - illustrate how this works referencing City of
London v Flegg (they successfully overreached the trust interest of
the parents)
If you established the trust interest has not been overreached, then
you look at notice - does the purchaser have notice?
Unregistered land the doctrine on notice applies Kings North v
Tizzard
Problem of property v transaction
Land was held by the feudal landlord
Witnesses were key because if eventually the crown came back and
claimed someone else to be the duke, the crown had to be sure
Transfer by livery by seisin
A valid conveyance of a feudal tenure in land required the physical
transfer by the transferor to the transferee, in the presence of
witnesses, a piece of the ground itself, in the literal sense of a hand-
to-hand passing of an amount of soil, a twig, key or other symbol.
To transfer it was the physical transfer of the property
Passage of the statute of Frauds 1677
More stable monarchy
Moved from the symbol/action to paper transaction
Transfers needed to be by deed and contracts must be in writing
Deeds are also required for other transactions in land (e.g. express
easement + legal mortgage BOTH must be via deed)
Deed must be delivered/transferred
Problem with deeds
To prove ownership, you need a chain of the historical record of all
the deeds relating to the land to prove in history that you owned it.
3
Doctrine of notice
LPA came into effect in 1925
Legal interests will bind the world, any purchaser of land would be
bound by any legal interests in the land
Easements are capable of being legal
Trusts, restricted covenants can only exist in equity, not capable of
being legal
Equity’s darling
Not bound by equitable interests
Equity does not touch you
You have checked physically
Risk to equitable owner and risk to purchaser. Purchaser doesn’t do
what their meant to do means they are not equity’s darling
Would a reasonable person have asked?
Land charges act deals with not registered lands, equitable interests
are covered by these acts.
Identifying equitable interests
Family interests cannot be compensated by compensations - special
protection
Commercial interests can be compensated by money
Trusts cannot be compensated by money
Midland Bank v Green [1981]
Entered into contract, father and son fell out so father sold land to
wife. Was he bound to contract?
In registered land you can put in A notice or overriding interests s70
LRA25 now LRA02
Trusts interests
You can overreach a trust interest which applies to
registered/unregistered land
If you're a purchaser s2 & 27 LPA, if you pay purchase money to, 2
or more trustees (legal owners) then as the purchaser you will not
be bound by a trust. Beneficial interest is now in the money you
paid for the property not in the home
(City of London v Flegg)
Legal title owners were the young couple, the beneficial interest was
all 4. young couple mortgaged the property, and the city of London
wanted their property back and the parents said we have a
beneficial interest.
Flegg’s had a remedy against the young couple. Purchaser had
overreached the trust interest so they could ignore. They paid
purchase money to 2 trustees.
Court said remedy for the Flegg’s is to go after the younger couple
If you don’t overreach in unregistered land, are you equity’s darling?
A person acquires a legal estate absolutely if they are a bona fide
purchaser, for value, without notice
Kingsnorth v Tizard
Some evidence of physical presence
1
, They didn’t ask, failure to ask meant that the bank had imputed
notice
Building society held that property on trust for themselves, and Ms
Tizzard.
Consequences of this is that they had no remedy which is the
danger of not overreaching.
Bank had purchased the legal title, but he could not sell what he
didn’t own (NEMO DAT)
They took subject to the rights which Mr Tizzard had been bound
If NOT overreached
If land is registered there is no doctrine of notice
Doctrine doesn’t apply
Interest may be over-riding (when interest in a land will bind a
purchaser)
Overreaching is when purchaser ignores trust interests because
they have paid purchase money to 2 or more trustees
2
, 2. Interests in Unregistered Land
Overreaching
Over-reachable interest
Beneficial interest behind a trust
Won’t apply if you inherit a property or its gifted to you. You have to
have paid over some money
Trusts interests can be over-reached (s2 LPA) - over-reachable
interests
Beneficial interest in the land has been transferred to the purchase
money
If property is overreached your beneficial interests moves to the
money
Property right is the beneficial interest
Two or more trustees - illustrate how this works referencing City of
London v Flegg (they successfully overreached the trust interest of
the parents)
If you established the trust interest has not been overreached, then
you look at notice - does the purchaser have notice?
Unregistered land the doctrine on notice applies Kings North v
Tizzard
Problem of property v transaction
Land was held by the feudal landlord
Witnesses were key because if eventually the crown came back and
claimed someone else to be the duke, the crown had to be sure
Transfer by livery by seisin
A valid conveyance of a feudal tenure in land required the physical
transfer by the transferor to the transferee, in the presence of
witnesses, a piece of the ground itself, in the literal sense of a hand-
to-hand passing of an amount of soil, a twig, key or other symbol.
To transfer it was the physical transfer of the property
Passage of the statute of Frauds 1677
More stable monarchy
Moved from the symbol/action to paper transaction
Transfers needed to be by deed and contracts must be in writing
Deeds are also required for other transactions in land (e.g. express
easement + legal mortgage BOTH must be via deed)
Deed must be delivered/transferred
Problem with deeds
To prove ownership, you need a chain of the historical record of all
the deeds relating to the land to prove in history that you owned it.
3
