Linda Ann Flowers v 1)The Chief Land Registrar 2) Thorpe Estates Limited
| Jurisdiction | UK Non-devolved |
| Judge | Mr Justice Morgan |
| Neutral Citation | [2018] UKUT 0145 (TCC) |
| Court | Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber) |
| Subject Matter | Land Registration,30 April 2018 |
| Date | 30 April 2018 |
| Published date | 30 April 2018 |
Page 1
[2018] UKUT 0145 (TCC)
LAND REGISTRATION – Land Registration Act 2002, section 108(2) – application to
First-tier Tribunal to set aside a deed purporting to cancel restrictive covenants and to
impose fresh covenants – applicant not a party to the deed – First-tier Tribunal held that
applicant did not have standing to apply to set aside the deed – appeal to Upper Tribunal
dismissed – when appropriate to make appellant pay the costs of two respondents –
summary assessment of costs
UPPER TRIBUNAL
TAX AND CHANCERY CHAMBER Appeal No: UT/2017/0049
BETWEEN:
LINDA ANN FLOWERS Appellant
and
(1) CHIEF LAND REGISTRAR
(2) THORPE ESTATE LIMITED Respondents
Tribunal: Hon Mr Justice Morgan
Sitting in public in London on 17 April 2018
The Appellant, Mrs Flowers, appeared in person
Ms Katrina Yates, counsel, instructed by The Treasury Solicitor, for the Chief Land
Registrar
Mr Simon Brilliant, counsel, instructed by Wallace LLP, for Thorpe Estate Limited
CROWN COPYRIGHT © 2018
Page 2
DECISION
Introduction
1. This is an appeal by Mrs Flowers against the order of the First-tier Tribunal
(Property Chamber, Land Registration) (“the FtT”) whereby an application
which she had made to the FtT on or about 15 December 2016 was dismissed.
The application was dismissed on the ground that Mrs Flowers did not have
standing to make such an application. The FtT did not consider any other
points which might have been relevant if Mrs Flowers had been held to have
standing to make the application.
2. On 25 July 2017, HH Judge Behrens granted Mrs Flowers permission to
appeal to the Upper Tribunal. Although the application to the FtT in December
2016 and Mrs Flowers’ Appellant’s Notice had named only the Chief Land
Registrar as a respondent, Judge Behrens directed that certain other persons,
namely, Mrs Cato and Thorpe Estate Ltd, should be served with a copy of the
application to the FtT and of his decision to grant permission to appeal. He
also directed that each of the relevant parties should indicate whether it wished
to take part in the appeal and to serve any Respondent’s Notice on which it
intended to reply. In due course, both the Chief Land Registrar and Thorpe
Estate Ltd served Respondent’s Notices. Mrs Cato did not indicate a wish to
take part in the appeal. On 30 November 2017, Judge Behrens gave directions
which were designed to confine the scope of the arguments on the appeal to
the question of Mrs Flower’s standing to make the application so that the
arguments on the appeal would not address underlying issues which might
arise if it were held that she did have the necessary standing. Mrs Flowers has
To continue reading
Request your trial