Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Overreaching In Registered Land Law.
View graph of relations

Overreaching In Registered Land Law.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Published
  • Nicola Jackson
Close
<mark>Journal publication date</mark>03/2006
<mark>Journal</mark>Modern Law Review
Issue number2
Volume69
Number of pages28
Pages (from-to)214-241
Publication StatusPublished
<mark>Original language</mark>English

Abstract

Beneficial interests under a trust were not intended to be overriding interests under section 70(1)(g) of the Land Registration Act 1925. The position was altered by Williams & Glyn's Bank Ltd v Boland, which determined that an interest under a trust for sale would bind a purchaser if the beneficiary were in actual occupation. The decision raised the question whether such interests could be overreached once the beneficiary was in occupation of the trust property. City of London Building Society v Flegg held that the relevant beneficial interest had been overreached. Both decisions assume that overreaching in registered conveyancing takes effect as it does in unregistered land. Yet there is considerable evidence that the Land Registration Act contains its own overreaching machinery. The House of Lords applied the wrong overreaching provisions in Boland and Flegg and there is no legal basis on which to recognise that trust interests can override a subsequent disposition under section 70(1)(g).

Bibliographic note

RAE_import_type : Journal article RAE_uoa_type : Law