Discussing UK law. Links: swarb.co.uk | law-index | Acts | Members Image galleries

Charity Cut Price Sale.

Re: Charity Cut Price Sale.

Postby Hairyloon » Thu Apr 20, 2017 4:59 pm

atticus wrote:That is the basis of much of the Law of Property Act 1925 and the Land Registration Acts.

Would you have a better pointer please? Much of that first one seems to be repealed.
Take me to your lizard...
User avatar
Hairyloon
 
Posts: 9711
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:12 pm
Location: From there to here and here to there... Funny things are everywhere.

Re: Charity Cut Price Sale.

Postby atticus » Thu Apr 20, 2017 5:27 pm

Were you referred to more than one statute?
User avatar
atticus
 
Posts: 19194
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:27 pm
Location: E&W

Re: Charity Cut Price Sale.

Postby Hairyloon » Thu Apr 20, 2017 6:18 pm

atticus wrote:Were you referred to more than one statute?

The "Land Registration Acts"?
Sorry, I have a headache.
Take me to your lizard...
User avatar
Hairyloon
 
Posts: 9711
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:12 pm
Location: From there to here and here to there... Funny things are everywhere.

Re: Charity Cut Price Sale.

Postby atticus » Thu Apr 20, 2017 6:32 pm

1925 and 2002, and no doubt others.
User avatar
atticus
 
Posts: 19194
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:27 pm
Location: E&W

Re: Charity Cut Price Sale.

Postby Hairyloon » Fri Apr 21, 2017 9:28 pm

atticus wrote:I was reply ing to your point about land being "irrevocably" sold. Any remaining trust attaches to the proceeds of sale...

Sorry, my question was not clear.
If the change to the proprietor entry in the registered title was made in error without any proper legal basis, then the property was not theirs to sell: if it was a chattel rather than property this would be conversion and the proper owner would be able to reclaim it.
Are the rules different because it is property?
Is it different because we are talking about proprietors not owners?
Take me to your lizard...
User avatar
Hairyloon
 
Posts: 9711
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:12 pm
Location: From there to here and here to there... Funny things are everywhere.

Re: Charity Cut Price Sale.

Postby atticus » Fri Apr 21, 2017 9:57 pm

That is why there are Acts of Parliament relating to the Sale of Goods and others relating to the Law of Property.
User avatar
atticus
 
Posts: 19194
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:27 pm
Location: E&W

Re: Charity Cut Price Sale.

Postby theycantdothat » Fri Apr 21, 2017 10:02 pm

Hairyloon wrote:
atticus wrote:I was reply ing to your point about land being "irrevocably" sold. Any remaining trust attaches to the proceeds of sale...

Sorry, my question was not clear.
If the change to the proprietor entry in the registered title was made in error without any proper legal basis, then the property was not theirs to sell: if it was a chattel rather than property this would be conversion and the proper owner would be able to reclaim it.
Are the rules different because it is property?
Is it different because we are talking about proprietors not owners?


It is not so much a question of "ownership" but of title. If you are the registered proprietor of land then de facto you have title even if you are registered in error. Absent any collusion, a purchaser is entitled to rely on the register; the "true" owner is left with a claim against the proprietor and/or Land Registry.

Going back to the conveyance, there is an argument that the words "To Hold unto the Purchasers in fee simple as a site for an Institute for the Women of x" did not create a fee simple absolute, but a conditional fee simple. Without going into technicalities, the effect of that is that on the land ceasing to be so used the Crown could claim it back. What happens if a conditional fee gets registered without the condition being noted I would not like to say.

Reading the Land Registration Act 2002 is unlikely to prove useful. Reading the Land Registration Act 1925 will definitely not prove useful as it has been repealed.
theycantdothat
 
Posts: 1102
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 7:36 pm

Re: Charity Cut Price Sale.

Postby Hairyloon » Fri Apr 21, 2017 10:36 pm

theycantdothat wrote:It is not so much a question of "ownership" but of title. If you are the registered proprietor of land then de facto you have title even if you are registered in error.

Thank you, except that is not quite right: in this case the proprietor does not have the title, it rests with the Official Custodian.
Absent any collusion, a purchaser is entitled to rely on the register; the "true" owner is left with a claim against the proprietor and/or Land Registry.

The party at fault here would be the Charity Commission.
To what value could that claim be?
Isn't the general principle that damages should set things straight? i.e pay for a replacement to what was lost (and costs, etc).
Going back to the conveyance, there is an argument that the words "To Hold unto the Purchasers in fee simple as a site for an Institute for the Women of x" did not create a fee simple absolute, but a conditional fee simple. Without going into technicalities, the effect of that is that on the land ceasing to be so used the Crown could claim it back. What happens if a conditional fee gets registered without the condition being noted I would not like to say.

Unless the Crown want to take it back, almost certainly nothing.
Reading the Land Registration Act 2002 is unlikely to prove useful.

I found nothing helpful, but I would not claim to have read it thoroughly.
Reading the Land Registration Act 1925 will definitely not prove useful as it has been repealed.

They do at least hint to that in the title. ;)
Take me to your lizard...
User avatar
Hairyloon
 
Posts: 9711
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:12 pm
Location: From there to here and here to there... Funny things are everywhere.

Previous

Return to Trusts/Equity/Charity

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests