Lloyds Bank v Carrick [1996]

Facts

  • Mrs Carrick, the sister in law of Mr Carrick, purchased an unregistered leashold estate from Mr Carrick, but failed to execute any formal conveyance
  • Mr Carrick subsequently mortgaged the estate and defaulted on payments

Issue

  • Could the bank obtain possession from Mrs Carrick?

Decision

  • Yes

Reasoning

  • As the agreement and sale was not recorded in the Land Charges Register, as required by the Land Charges Act 1972, the mortgageĀ took priority over Mrs Carrick’s unregistered interest (a class C(iv) land charge)
  • ‘Actual occupation’ is irrelevant to commercial equitable interests, unlike in registered land, where Mrs Carrick would have been entitled to priority over the bank’s interest under what is now Schedule 3, Paragraph 2 of the Land Registration Act 2002
  • Proprietary estoppel will not operate to correct a lack of registration under the Land Charges Act 1972
RELATED CASE  Blacklocks v JB Developments [1982]

Posted in Land Law Revision Notes.

This page was last updated on 24th April 2015

© 2020 Webstroke Law - Terms and Privacy Policy