Mistakes, mispleading and overreaching: understanding title registration and correcting the register
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/JPPEL-11-2021-0053 |
| Published date | 18 March 2022 |
| Date | 18 March 2022 |
| Pages | 1-10 |
| Subject Matter | Property management & built environment,Building & construction,Building & construction law,Real estate & property,Property law |
| Author | Martin Dixon |
Mistakes, mispleading and
overreaching: understanding
title registration and
correcting the register
Martin Dixon
Department of Land Economy and Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge,
Cambridge, UK
Abstract
Purpose –The purpose of this paper is to analyse whether title toland is secure in England and Wales
when registered under the Land RegistrationAct (LRA) 2002, in particular when a title is registered, where
there has beena mistake and how that connects with the doctrine of overreaching.
Design/methodology/approach –This paper analyses the reported judgments, with particular
emphasison the decisionin Knight vFernley(2021).
Findings –This paper explores the conceptsof “mistake”and “overreaching”and concludes that LRA 2002
providesa complex, but complete answer to concerns about the applicationof these doctrines.
Practical implications –This paper will encourage certainty in the judicial decision-making process
when “mistakes”occur in the land register. It will contribute to the resolution of difficult, and current,
controversies.
Social implications –To enable legal advisers to be clear in their obligationsand the advice they give to
clients,and to further a better understanding of titleregistration in England and Wales.
Originality/value –The LRA 2002 replaces registrationof title with title by registration. The real force of
this is only now being realised and thereare few reported judgments, and less consistency, working out what
this means in practice. Thereare no other comments on this critical case, even though it helps elucidatethe
circumstancesin which the title register may be altered.
Keywords Registration, Land, Guarantee, Mistake, Overreaching, Title
Paper type Case study
Imagine finding a dream home, raising the money [1], engaging solicitors and completing
the purchase, only to find some time later that, in fact, according to Her Majesty’sLand
Registry, you were not in fact the owner. Worse still, as a result of an initial error on the part
of your solicitors,who had failed to register your title, you discover that yourhome has been
conveyed to, and registeredin, the name of your neighbours. For their part, your neighbours
thought they were buying a small plot of land for £2,500 but are inadvertently now the
registered proprietors of your property, a property many, many times more valuable than
the price they paid. They also, of course, still own their actual home. You might think that
this was annoying, but not a serious cause for concern. Surely, the neighbours would not
contest the “return”[2] of the property to you, and you mightbuy them a small gift to thank
them for their understanding? Alternatively, should the neighbours prove reluctant to
surrender their windfall, despite knowing fully well that the property was not meant for
them, surely the register of titles could be amended fairly simply, the cost being borne by
your lawyers who had made the initial error. However,as Knight vFernley [3] demonstrates,
Mistakes,
mispleading
and
overreaching
1
Received16 November 2021
Revised26 November 2021
Accepted27 January 2022
Journalof Property, Planning and
EnvironmentalLaw
Vol.14 No. 1, 2022
pp. 1-10
© Emerald Publishing Limited
2514-9407
DOI 10.1108/JPPEL-11-2021-0053
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
https://www.emerald.com/insight/2514-9407.htm
To continue reading
Request your trial