Title by registration or conquest: Interpreting the Land Registration Act 2002 in England and Wales

Dixon, M (2013) Title by registration or conquest: Interpreting the Land Registration Act 2002 in England and Wales. International Journal of Law in the Built Environment, 5(3), pp. 194-206. ISSN 17561469

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 2002, in particular when a title is registered without the proprietor being able to establish good title under pre-registration rules of property law. Design/methodology/approach: This paper analyses reported judgments, with particular emphasis on the decision in Walker v. Burton [2012]. Findings: The paper identifies an uncertainty at the heart of the registration system: the uncertainty as to the extent to which a registered title may be rectified to remove the proprietor. This is acute when it appears that the registered proprietor has no claim to the land other than by reason of his registration. There may be a difference in this regard between intangible property titles and tangible titles. Originality/value: The Land Registration Act 2002 is meant to replace registration of title with title by registration. The real force of this is only now being realised and there are few reported judgements, and less consistency, working out what this means in practice.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: alteration; conclusive register; land registration; rectification; title guarantee
Index terms: heart, land, England, judgment, land registration, methodology, Wales, property law, guarantee
Subjects: dispute resolution, property law, real estate economics, Geography, research methods, medical science and clinical practice, contract structure
Topics: Urban Studies, Legal Issues, Procurement, Health and Safety, Research Practice, Geographical Context
Descriptive scope: 3 PCT

N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here