Legal News

Transfer from the Crown following escheat not subject to equitable interest due to lack of ‘actual occupation’ (Rock Ferry Waterfront Trust and another v Penninstone Holdings Ltd)

Transfer from the Crown following escheat not subject to equitable interest due to lack of ‘actual occupation’ (Rock Ferry Waterfront Trust and another v Penninstone Holdings Ltd)
Published on: 26 November 2020
Published by: LexisPSL
  • Transfer from the Crown following escheat not subject to equitable interest due to lack of ‘actual occupation’ (Rock Ferry Waterfront Trust and another v Penninstone Holdings Ltd)
  • What are the practical implications of this case?
  • What was the background?
  • What did the court decide?
  • Estoppel
  • Estate contract within the LCA 1972
  • Equitable doctrine of notice
  • Actual occupation under LRA 2002, Sch 1
  • Actual occupation under LRA 2002, Sch 3
  • Case details

Article summary

Property Disputes analysis: This case concerned an attempt by a transferee for value of registered land who deliberately chose not to register the transfer to bind a subsequent purchaser. The important issues raised were whether the earlier purchaser was estopped from asserting its rights, the definition of ‘estate contract’ under the Land Charges Act 1972 (LCA 1972), the equitable doctrine of constructive notice and the overriding interest arising from ‘actual occupation’ under Schedule 1 of the Land Registration Act 2002 (LRA 2002) (which governs first registration of title). The earlier purchaser’s claim was dismissed and the subsequent purchasers took free of its rights. Written by Richard Oughton, barrister, at Cobden House Chambers, Manchester and Octagon Legal, Norwich. or take a trial to read the full analysis.

Popular documents