The Land Registration Act 2002 (LRA 2002) created a new regime in respect of the law of adverse possession in respect of registered land, as set out in LRA 2002, Sch 6. The new regime gives greater protection to landowners where a claim for adverse possession of land is made. The fact of adverse possession for a period in excess of 12 years no longer means that the land will have been acquired by the adverse possessor. Instead, after a period of ten years of adverse possession, the squatter can apply to be registered as proprietor of that land. On the making of an application,

Where a property is owned by joint tenants of both the legal and beneficial interests, the co-owners do not have a divisible share of the property and so on the death of one joint tenant, the deceased’s interest passes automatically to the other under the right of survivorship. Possession proceedings are brought by the ‘landlord’. In the case of a property which is let on an assured shorthold tenancy (AST), the landlord ‘includes any person from

The following Q&A addresses this question: Is a sole LPA attorney permitted to purchase real property from the donor where

The Q&A refers to the ‘hedge and ditch rule’ which is a legal presumption that when adjoining land held by different owners is separated by a hedge and ditch, the hedge and ditch will be deemed to belong to the owner of the land on the same side of the ditch as the hedge is situated, unless there is evidence to the contrary. The two presumptions that the rule relies upon were detailed in Alan Wibberley Building Limited v Insley: • the ditch was dug after the boundary was drawn, and • when a person cuts a ditch they will do so at the very

In situations where it is unclear whether the untraceable tenant in common is alive or dead, see Practice Note: Missing persons and presumption of death. The following Practice Notes may also be of interest: Declarations of presumed death and Missing beneficiaries and intestacy with no surviving relatives. In respect of trusts of land, see Trusts subtopic: Trusts of land—overview, including: • Practice Note: Buying property from a sole surviving co-owner

We have assumed that a restriction has been registered against the legal title held by A and B to reflect the underlying beneficial interests. It is also assumed that the proposed declaration of trust by B over a 50% beneficial interest would be a bare trust in favour of B and C. A declaration of trust could be executed by a beneficial owner (B) in respect of B's 50% beneficial interest in favour of B and C, but that may be over-complicating the ownership structure, as there would be two levels of trusts; one relating to the legal title and the other relating to B's share

Following the death of A, the legal title in the property vests in B alone. B will continue to hold the property on a trust of land, as to a 50% beneficial interest for B and a 50% beneficial interest for the beneficiaries of A's estate. The doctrine of overreaching enables purchasers in good faith for money or moneys worth to rely solely on the legal title. However, to overreach any beneficial interests behind the trust the buyer must pay the purchase money to at least two trustees or a trust corporation. Where the beneficial interests are overreached, the trust attaches to the proceeds of sale. Where only one co-owner of land survives, it is useful to check: • if it is necessary for the surviving

A covenant to erect a fence or a hedge is a positive covenant. It is likely that the transfer will identify the land to benefit from the covenant. The benefit of a positive covenant may benefit successors-in-title by 'running with the land' both in common law and in equity, provided

Property in England and Wales when jointly owned is held as legal joint tenants (being the persons registered as the legal owners of the property, or, where it is unregistered, the legal owners), who hold it on trust for the beneficial owners (usually themselves, but not always). The beneficial ownership can be held as joint tenants or as tenants in common. The former means that the beneficial owners each own the whole of the property (‘per muy et per tout’); the latter means that the parties have defined interests (which, if there is no declaration of trust is rebuttably presumed to be equal

We have assumed that B has no legal ownership of the home or business in question. We can’t provide advice on fact specific scenarios and the remedy available to a claimant in a constructive trust case will depend on the entire course of dealings between the parties. However, we refer you to the following resources, which explain

We refer you to Q&A: Jointly owned property and loss of capacity Q&As, in particular the section headed ‘Cases where the incapacitated trustee has appointed an attorney(s) under an enduring or lasting Powers of Attorney’. As a joint owner of the property,

In this Q&A, A and B, a married couple, have a bank account in joint names. A has now died. Within the seven years prior to A’s death, a gift was made out of the joint account to Y. B has stated that she made the gift. The issue is how are gifts from joint accounts treated for the purposes of the general law and for the purposes of tax law. Joint accounts—general law For the purposes of the general law, if a bank account is held in joint names, the inference is that it is intended that there would be beneficial co-ownership unless there is evidence to the contrary: Re Figgis. The co-owners would