Unregistered interests that override registered interests

Question 1

Chhokar v Chhokar [1984] FLR 313

Answer 1

A house, in Chhokar v Chhokar [1984] Fam Law 269: no requirement for ‘continued and uninterrupted presence’, but there must be ‘some degree of permanence and continuity’, and, if the person is absent from the property, ‘an intention to return’.

Question 2

Malory Enterprises Ltd v Cheshire Homes [2002] EWCA Civ 151

Answer 2

derelict land, in Malory Enterprises v Cheshire Homes [2002] Ch 216 : boarding up windows, erecting a ‘No Trespassers’ sign and building a fence, installing a padlocked gate, were held to constitute actual occupation in those circumstances.

Question 3

Chaudhary v Yavus [2011] EWCA 1314

Answer 3

a metal staircase, in Chaudhary v Yavus [2011] EWCA 1314: in this dispute over an easement; using the staircase was held not to constitute actual occupation.

Question 4

Link Lending v Bustard [2010] EWCA Civ 424

Answer 4

‘The trend of the cases shows that the courts are reluctant to lay down, or even suggest, a single test for determining whether a person is in actual occupation. The decisions on statutory construction identify the factors that have to be weighed by the judge on this issue. The degree of permanence and continuity of the person concerned, the intentions and wishes of that person, the length of absence from the property and the reason for it and the nature of the property and personal circumstances of the person are among the relevant factors’.
- Mummery LJ at [27]