Priorities (Disputes) Flashcards
What is the primary consideration in determining actual occupation according to Abbey National BS v Cann [1991]?
Actual occupation is primarily a factual question, emphasising the need for some degree of permanence and continuity.
According to Lord Oliver in Abbey National BS v Cann [1991], do mere preparatory steps constitute actual occupation?
No, mere preparatory steps do not constitute actual occupation.(Requires permanence)
What do cases like Malory Enterprises Ltd v Cheshire Homes Ltd [2002] and Pennistone Holdings Ltd v Rock Ferry Waterfront Trust [2021] highlight about actual occupation?
These cases discussed the manifestations of actual occupation, including physical actions taken on the property and visible signs of possession.
How do cases such as Strand Securities Ltd v Caswell and Kling v Keston Properties Ltd contribute to the understanding of actual occupation?
They explored the nuances of occupation in contexts like parking spaces and the use of land for storage, demonstrating the complexity of determining actual occupation.
What aspect of actual occupation is examined in Chhokar v Chhokar [1984] and Kingsnorth Finance Co v Tizard [1986]?
These cases examined how personal circumstances and intentions can affect the assessment of actual occupation, acknowledging that physical presence is not the sole determinant.
Chhokar v Chhokar [1984]= outlined that
Temporary absence can still amount to actual occupation.
Kingsnorth Finance Co v Tizard [1986]= outlined that
a wife’s beneficial interest in the matrimonial home can serve to bind a purchaser for value who fails to adequately inspect a property.
What principle did Birmingham Midshires Mortgage Services Ltd v Sabherwal and Sweet v Sommer [2005] clarify?
They clarified the concept of overreaching, stating that certain equitable rights, including those from proprietary estoppel, can be overreached by legal charges.
What did Mortgage Express v Lambert [2016] affirm about overreaching?
(Which statutory provision was followed to aid this conclusion?)
It affirmed that overreaching can apply to a wide range of equitable interests.
An “equity” or a “mere equity” which, under s116 Land Registration Act 2002, is an interest capable of being an overriding interest and therefore is proprietary in character
What is the significance of Baker v Craggs [2018] in the context of legal easements and property transactions?
It delved into the complexities of legal easements and their implications for property transactions.
(Beneficial interest in land cannot be overreached from the sale of an easement or any interest other than the two types of estates (fee simple and lease) in land)
How does State Bank of India v Sood [1997] contribute to the understanding of overreaching principles?
It addressed challenges in cases where mortgages are executed without the receipt of capital money, illustrating the nuanced application of overreaching principles.
Overreaching will operate even where a mortgage discharged existing indebtedness so that no money was advanced:
State Bank of India v Sood [1997] 1 All ER 169
What principle is illustrated by Wishart v Credit and Mercantile plc [2015] in the context of land registration?
It illustrated the principles of estoppel, focusing on the role of agency and the representation of authority, and how it may preclude a claimant from asserting priority over registered charges.
What concern do scholars like Bogusz and Bevan raise regarding judicial reliance in determining actual occupation?
They critique the judicial reliance on intentions and wishes in determining actual occupation, cautioning against “occupation creep” that could extend legal protection in unexpected ways.
What ongoing discussion reflects the tension in property law between protecting beneficial interests and ensuring the marketability of land?
The discussion around overreaching, mere equities, and the balance between protecting beneficial interests and ensuring the marketability of land reflects this tension.
