Transfers and assignments

Section 52(1) of the Law of Property Act 1925 (LPA 1925) requires that a transfer of a legal interest in land is made by deed.

The fundamental objective of the Land Registration Act 2002 (LRA 2002) is 'total registration', where the register of title provides a complete and accurate reflection of the state of the title to the land at any given time. LRA 2002, s 4 requires the buyer of an unregistered freehold or lease with more than seven years unexpired (ie a qualifying estate) to apply for first registration.

The Land Registration Rules 2003, SI 2003/1417 (Land Registration Rules) deal with the background technical detail of registration and HM Land Registry has issued a number of Practice Guides.

Transfers

The Land Registration Rules prescribe the form of transfer that should be used to transfer a qualifying estate. These are:

  1. TR1—Transfer of whole

  2. TP1—Transfer of part of registered title(s)

  3. TR2—Transfer of whole of registered title(s) under power of sale

  4. TP2—Transfer of part of registered title(s) under power of sale

  5. TR5—Transfer of portfolio of titles (whole or part)

  6. AS1—Assent

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

Powered by Lexis+®
Latest Property News

Insolvency, declarations of trust, loan agreements, artificial asset protection, sham transactions, transactions defrauding creditors, interspousal asset transfers, change of position defence and wife’s entitlement to share of husband’s assets (Sayers v Dixon)

Restructuring & Insolvency analysis: The court held that six declarations of trust (DoTs) executed by the transferor (Mr Dixon) in favour of his wife (Mrs Dixon) constituted transactions defrauding his creditors within the meaning of section 423 of the Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986) and that two of them, purporting to transfer all his future assets and income to Mrs Dixon, along with an accompanying loan agreement, were shams which were void and ineffective. It set aside the DoTs and ordered Mrs Dixon to restore the value of three transferred properties (which had been converted into £551,589 cash) to Mr Dixon’s trustees in bankruptcy (trustees) together with interest of £101,726. It also ordered an account to be taken of the funds that had been transferred to Mrs Dixon or on her behalf by Mr Dixon over the seven years between the date of the DoTs and his bankruptcy. The court dismissed Mrs Dixon’s defence of change of position to the trustees’ claim for restoration, finding that even if such a defence were generally available (which is unclear), she had not acted in good faith and could not rely on it. It also dismissed her defence that, having been married to Mr Dixon for many years, she was entitled to half his assets and/or an entitlement to a share of them by virtue of a right to be maintained. Written by Jonathan Lopian, barrister at New Square Chambers, who acted for the successful claimants.

View Property by content type :

Popular documents