About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


14 J. Prop. Plan. & Env't L. 1 (2022)

handle is hein.journals/jppel14 and id is 1 raw text is: The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at: https://www emerald.com/insight/2514-9407.htm 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 to land is secure in England and Wales when registered under the Land Registration Act (LRA) 2002, in particular when a title is registered, where there has been a mistake and how that connects with the doctrine of overreaching. Design/methodology/approach - This paper analyses the reported judgments, with particular emphasis on the decision in Knightv Fernley (2021). Findings - This paper explores the concepts of mistake and overreaching and concludes that LRA 2002 provides a complex, but complete answer to concerns about the application of 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 obligations and the advice they give to clients, and to further a better understanding of title registration in England and Wales. Originality/value - The LRA 2002 replaces registration of title with title by registration. The real force of this is only now being realised and there are few reported judgments, and less consistency, working out what this means in practice. There are no other comments on this critical case, even though it helps elucidate the circumstances in 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's Land 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 your home has been conveyed to, and registered in, 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 might buy 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 v Fernley [3] demonstrates, Mistakes, mispleading and overreaching 1 Received 16 November 2021 Revised 26 November 2021 Accepted 27 January 2022 Journa of Property, Planning and Environmental Law Vol.14 No. 1,2022 pp. 1-10 ©EmeraldPublishingLimited 2514-940 DOI 10.108/JPPEL-11-2021-01E3