Instant Ebook Access, One Click Away – Begin at ebooknice.

com

(Ebook) Land Law Concentrate by Victoria Sayles

ISBN 9780198855224, 0198855222

[Link]

OR CLICK BUTTON

DOWLOAD EBOOK

Get Instant Ebook Downloads – Browse at [Link]

 Instant digital products (PDF, ePub, MOBI) ready for you
Download now and discover formats that fit your needs...

Start reading on any device today!

(Ebook) Land Law Concentrate by Victoria Sayles ISBN 9780192605795, 0192605798,

B08K947YWD

[Link]

[Link]

(Ebook) Tort Law Concentrate by CAROL. BRENNAN ISBN 9780198840541, 0198840543

[Link]

[Link]

(Ebook) Commercial Law Concentrate by ERIC. BASKIND ISBN 9780198840619, 0198840616

[Link]

[Link]

(Ebook) Company Law Concentrate by Lee Roach ISBN 9780198855019, 019885501X

[Link]

[Link]
(Ebook) Company Law Concentrate: Law Revision and Study Guide by Lee Roach ISBN
9780198703808, 0198703805

[Link]
guide-5095816

[Link]

(Ebook) International Law Concentrate by Ilias Bantekas, Efthymios Papastavridis

ISBN 9780199676538, 0199676534

[Link]

[Link]

(Ebook) International Law Concentrate: Law Revision and Study Guide by Illias
Bantekas, Efthymios Papastavridis ISBN 9780192895684, 0192895680

[Link]
study-guide-38364942

[Link]

(Ebook) English Legal System Concentrate: Law Revision and Study Guide by Tim
Vollans ISBN 9780199654239, 0199654239

[Link]
study-guide-47508106

[Link]

(Ebook) Concentrate Questions and Answers Evidence: Law Q&A Revision and Study Guide
by Maureen Spencer

[Link]
a-revision-and-study-guide-47508110

[Link]
 Revision & study guides
from the No.l legal education publisher

Concentrate

LAND LAW Seventh Edition

Victoria Sayles

consolidate knowledge > focus revision > maximise potential

OXFORD
 V
Revision & study guides
for when you're aiming high
. • HO 1 . k - - .

lc. ; -JU r . ■ -.-■auu’jro.'?'..

Ho.1 - c«rx»*s'«» ftrmr. No.I ■ - '

A. x. < >

‘ » V-lrjr'K
<•' - Ha.I ,7»s

GEMINALUAW UAW

More titles available in your campus bookstore or

buy online at [Link]/lawrevision/

consolidate knowledge > focus revision > maximise potential

FREE online study and revision
support available at
[Link]/lawrevision
Take your learning further with:
- Multiple-choice questions with instant feedback
- Interactive glossaries and flashcards of key cases
- Tips, tricks and audio advice
- Annotated outline answers v.
- Diagnostic tests show you where to concentrate \
- Extra questions, key facts checklists,
and topic overviews

r
2SE2ES Higher Education

Law Revision
z.'xxx:zrxxrrxrxxzxrx:

1^3==^===^
ConcKXrot. »«wwn & Study gu«

xrxxxx:
X■.TXXT

-
77 fe_.----- ?.ai

—
7
New to this edition

• Coverage of new and additional case law:

- Brighton & Hove City Council v Andus (2009);
- De La Cuona v Big Apple Marketing Ltd [2017];
- Edwards v Lloyds TSB [2004];
- Shami v Shami [2012];
- State Bank of India v Sood [1997];
- Williams v Williams [1976]; and
- Wilshart v Credit & Mercantile pic [2015].
• Updated ‘Looking for extra marks?’
Land Law

Victoria Sayles
Visiting Lecturer, BPP and University of Law

OXFORD
UNIVERSITY PRESS
 OXFORD
UNIVERSITY PRESS

Great Clarendon Street, Oxford, OX2 6DP,

United Kingdom
Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford.
It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship,
and education by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of
Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries
© Oxford University Press 2020
The moral rights of the author have been asserted
Fourth edition 2014
Fifth edition 2016
Sixth edition 2018
Impression: 1
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in
a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the
prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted
by law, by licence or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics
rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the
above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the
address above
You must not circulate this work in any other form
and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer
Public sector information reproduced under Open Government Licence v3.0
(httpV/[Link]/doc/open-government-licence/[Link])
Published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press
198 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016, United States of America
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
Data available
Library of Congress Control Number: 2020935283
ISBN 978-0-19-885522-4
Printed in Great Britain by
Bell & Bain Ltd., Glasgow
Links to third party websites are provided by Oxford in good faith and
for information only. Oxford disclaims any responsibility for the materials
contained in any third party website referenced in this work.
Contents

Table of cases vi
Table of legislation xiv

1 Introduction: proprietary rights 1

2 The distinction between legal and equitable interests 14

3 Registered land 28

4 Unregistered land 49

5 The freehold estate 60

6 The leasehold estate 74

7 Covenants in leases 95
8 Adverse possession 113

9 Trusts of land 128

10 Co-ownership 143

11 Licences and proprietary estoppel 165

12 Easements and profits 178

13 Freehold covenants 201

14 Mortgages 222

Outline answers Al
Glossary A9
Index A13
Table of cases

88 Berkley Road, Re [1971] Ch 648 ... 153,163 Bank of Baroda v Rayerel [1995] 2 HLR
89 Holland Park (Management) Ltd v Hicks 387.. .232
[2013] EWHC 391 (Ch)... 211 Bank of Ireland Home Mortgages Ltd v Bell
[2001] 2 FLR 809 ... 158, 159
Abbey National BS v Cann [1991] 1 AC 56, Barca v Mears [2005] BPIR 15 ... 145,161
HL ... 43-4,46 Barclay v Barclay [1970] 2 QB 677 ... 138
Adealon International Proprietary Ltd v Barclays Bank Ltd v Bird [1954] Ch 274 ... 234
Merton Borough Council [2007] EWCA Civ
Barclays Bank Ltd v Taylor [1974] Ch 137 ... 86
362; [2007] 1 WLR 1898 ... 186
Barclays Bank pic v O’Brien [1994] 1 AC
AG Securities Ltd v Vaughan [1990] 1
180.. .231
AC 417 ... 75,76, 79,80, 82, 92,145,146,149,
A3, AS Barclays Bank pic v Thomson [1997 J 4 All ER
816.. .232
Akici v LR Butlin [2006] 1 WLR 201... 91
Batchelor v Marlow [2003] 1 WLR 764 ... 184,
Alec Lobb (Garages) Ltd v Total Oil GB Ltd
197, A6
[1985] 1 All ER 303 ... 229
Beaulane Properties Ltd v Palmer [2005] 4 All
Alford v Hannaford [2011] EWCA
ER 461... 119, 125
Civ 1099... 190
Ali v Hussein (1974)... 159 Begum v Issa [2014] EW Misc B51 ... 43
Anchor Brewhouse Developments v Berkley Berkley v Poulett [1977] 1 EGLR 86 ... 7
House (Docklands Developments) Ltd (1987) Bernstein of Leigh (Baron) v Skyviews &
38 BLR 82 ... 5, Al General Ltd [1978] QB 479 ... 3, 5,11
Antoniades v Villiers [1990] 1 AC 417 ... 80, Berrisford v Mexfield Housing Co-operative
82, 93, A3 Ltd [2011] UKSC 52 ... 76, 78, A2
Appleby v UK (2003) 37 EHRR 783 ... 169 Best v Chief Land Registrar [2014] EWHC
Arlesford Trading Co Ltd v Servansingh [1971] 1370 (Admin)... 116
1 WLR 1080 ... 109 BHP Petroleum GB Ltd v Chesterfield
Ashburn Anstalt v Arnold [1989] Ch 1... 76, Properties Ltd [2000] Ch 234 ... 104,108
77,167,168,172,175, A2, A5, A6 Biggs v Hoddinott [1898] 2 Ch 307 ... 228
Ashworth Frazer Ltd v Gloucester CC [2001] 1 Billson v Residential Apartments Ltd [1992] 1
WLR 2180 ... 102, A3 AC 494 .. .91,92
Aslan v Murphy [1990] 1 WLR 766 ... 80, 81, Binions v Evans [1972] Ch 359 ... 171, A6
93, A3 Bocardo SA v Star Energy UK Onshore Ltd
Attwood v Bovis Homes Ltd [2001] Ch 379... 196 [2010] UKSC 35 ... 6
Austerberry v Corporation of Oldham (1885) Borman v Griffith [1930] 1 Ch 493 ... 188,189
29 Ch D 750... 214, A7 Botham v TSB Bank pic [1997] 73
P&CRD 1 ...7,11, Al
Bailey v Stephens (1862) 12 CB (NS) 91... 182 Breams Property Investment Co Ltd v
Ballards Conveyance, Re [1937] Ch 473 ... 207, Stroulger [1948] 2 KB 1 ... 106
210, 219, A7 Bremner, Re [199911 FLR 912 ... 161
Banco Exterior International v Mann [1995] 1 Brew Brothers v Snax (Ross) Ltd [1970] 1 QB
All ER 936 ... 232 612.. . 99,110

vi Concentrate Land Law

 Table of cases
*****
Bridges v Mees [1957] Ch 475 ... 122 Clarke v Murphy [2009]... 213
Brighton & Hove City Council v Audus [2009] Claughton v Charalambous [1999] 1 FLR
EWHC 340 (Ch)... 227 740.. . 161
British & Benningtons Ltd v NW Cachar Tea Cleaver v Mutual Reserve Fund [1892] 1 QB
Co [1923] AC 48 ... 69 147.. .156
Brown v Raindie (1796) 3 Ves 256 ... 153 Clore v Theatrical Properties [1936] 2 All ER
Bruton v London & Quadrant Housing Trust 483.. .168
[2000] 1 AC 406 ... 76, 77, 84, 93,172 Coatsworth v Johnson (1885) 55 LJQB
Buchanan-Wollaston’s Conveyance, Re [1939] 220 ... 19, 26, 85, 86
Ch 738 ... 158,163 Cobbe v Yeoman’s Row Management Ltd
Buckinghamshire CC v Moran [1990] Ch 623, [2008] UKHL 55; [2008] 4 All ER 713; 1 WLR
CA ... 115, 116,118,119, 120, 125, A4 1752 ... 70, 72,173,174, 175
Bull v Bull [1955] 1 QB 234 ... 149, A5 Commission for the New Towns v Cooper (GB)
Ltd [1995] Ch 259 ... 69, 72
Burgess v Rawnsley [1975] Ch 429 ... 154,155,
156,162, A5 Coombes v Smith [1986] 1 WLR 808 ... 173
Copeland v Greenhalf [1952] Ch 488 ... 184,
C Putnam & Sons v Taylor [2009] 1 P&CR 198, A6
DG5 ... 158, 159 Courage Ltd v Crehan [2002] QB 507 ... 229
Caddick v Whitsand Bay Holiday Park Ltd Cowcher v Cowcher [1972] 1 WLR 425 ... 149
[2015] UKUT 63 (LC)... 7 Crabb v Arun DC [1976] Ch 179 ... 173,174
Caines, Re [1978] 1 WLR 540 ... 151 Crago v Julian [1992] 1 All ER 744 ... 87
Campbell v Banks [2011] EWCA Civ 61... 190 Credit Suisse v Beegas Nominees Ltd [1994] 4
Central Estates (Belgravia) Ltd v Woolgar All ER 805 ... 98
(No 2) [1972] 1 WLR 1048 ... 89 Crest Nicholson Residential (South) Ltd v
Central London Commercial Estates Ltd v McAllister [2004] 1 WLR 2409 ... 211
Kato Kagaku Ltd [1998] 4 All ER 948 ... 124 Crow v Wood [1971] 1 QB 77 ... 183
Chaffe v Kingsley [2000] 1 EGLR 104 ... 182 Cuckmere Brick Co Ltd v Mutual Finance Ltd
Chandler v Clark [2003] 1 P&CR 15 ... 149 [1971] Ch 949 ... 236
Chandless-Chandless v Nicholson [1942] 1 KB
321...92 David v LB Lewisham (1977) 34 P&CR 112... 81
Chaudhary v Yavuz [2011] EWCA Civ Davies v Davies [2016] EWCA Civ 463 ... 174
1314 ... 38.195 Davies v Jones [2009] EWCA Civ 1164 ... 215
Cheltenham & Gloucester BS v Norgan [1996] Davis v Smith [2011] EWCA Civ 1603 ... 155, A5
1 WLR 343 ... 233, 239 De La Cuona v Big Apple Marketing Ltd [2017]
Cheltenham & Gloucester pic v Krauz [1997] 1 EWHC 3783 (Ch)... 185
WLR 1558 ... 233 Dean v Andrews [1986] 1 EGLR 262 ... 7
Chhokar v Chhokar [1984] FLR 313, CA ... 43, Dennis v McDonald [1981] 1 WLR 810; [1982]
46 Fam 63 ... 139, 159
Citro, Re [1991] Ch 132 ... 161 D’Eyncourt v Gregory (1866) LR 3 Eq
City & Metropolitan Properties Ltd v 382.. . 7,11, Al
Greycroft Ltd [1987] 1 WLR 1085 ... 104,107 Diligent Finance Co Ltd v Alleyne [1972] 23
City of London Building Society v Flegg [1988] P&CR 346 ... 55, 58
AC 54 .. .39,46, 57, Al Dillwynn v Llewellyn (1862) 31 LJ Ch
Cityland & Property (Holdings) Ltd v Dabrah 658.. .174
[1968] Ch 166 ... 224, 229, 240, A7 Dolphin’s Conveyance, Re [1970] Ch 654 ... 213

Table of cases vii

IUUIL Ul LUAS!,
* afe ijc <•' t-r

Donohoe v Ingram [2006] EWHC 282 ... 145, First National Bank v Achampong [2004]
161 1 FCR 18 ... 157, 158
Donovan and another v Rana and another First National Bank v Syed [1991] 2 All ER
[2014] EWCA Civ 99 ... 187 250.. .233
Draper’s Conveyance, Re [1969] 1 Ch First National Securities Ltd v Hegarty [1985]
486.. . 152,154, 163, AS QB 850 ... 154, A5
Duncliffe v Caerfelin Properties Ltd [1989] 2 Firstpost Homes Ltd v Johnson [1995] 1 WLR
EGLR 38 ... 108 1567.. . 69, 72
Dyce v Lady James Hay (1852) 1 Macq Fitzkriston LLP v Panayi [2008] EWCA Civ
305.. .182 283.. .86
Dyer v Dyer (1788) 2 Cox 92 ... 130,134 Fitzwilliam v Richall Holdings Services Ltd
[2013] EWHC 86 (Ch)... 32
Eastern Telegraph Co Ltd v Dent [1899] 1 QB Flight v Thomas (1841) 8 Cl & Fin 231 ... 193
835...102 Ford and another v Alexander [2012] EWHC
Ecclesiastical Commissioners for England’s 266 (Ch); [2012] BPIR 528 ... 162
Conveyance, Re [1936] Ch 430 ... 204 Four Maids Ltd v Dudley Marshall
Edwards v Lloyds TSB [2004] EWCH (Properties) Ltd [1957] Ch 317 ... 232
1754 ... 158 Fred Perry v Genis [2015] 1 P&CR DG5 ... 158
Elitestone Ltd v Morris [1971] 1 WLR 687 ... 7, Friends Provident Life Office v British
11, Al Railways Board [1996] 1 All ER 336 ... 105
Ellenborough Park, Re [1956] Ch 131... 168, Fullers Contract, Re [1933] Ch 652 ... 149
178,179,180,181,183,198, A6
Errington v Errington & Woods [1952] 1 KB George Wimpey & Co Ltd v Sohn [1967] Ch
90... 171,172 487.. . 117
Esso Petroleum Co Ltd v Fumegrange [1994] Gillet v Holt [2000] 2 All ER 289 ... 173,174
46 EG 199... 81 Goldberg v Edwards [1950] Ch 247 ... 188
Esso Petroleum Co Ltd v Harper’s Garage Goodman v Gallant [1986] Fam 106 ... 145,
(Stourport) Ltd [19681 AC 269 ... 229 152, 160, A5
Estates Gazette Ltd v Benjamin Restaurants
Gore and Snell v Carpenter (1990) 60 P&CR
Ltd [1994] 1 WLR 1528 ... 106
456 ... 153,155, A5
Everitt v Budhram [2009] EWHC 1219
Greasley v Cooke [1980] 3 All ER 710 ... 173
(Ch)... 161
Greater London Council v Jenkins [1975] 1 All
Evers Trust, Re [1980] 1 WLR 1327 ... 158,163 ER 354 ... 169
Expert Clothing Service & Sales Ltd v Hillgate
Green v Ashco Horticulturalist Ltd [1966] 2
House Ltd [1986] Ch 340 ... 91
All ER 232; [1966] 1 WLR 889 ... 185
Facchini v Bryson [1952 ] 1 TLR 1386... 75, Greenfield v Greenfield (1970) 38 P&CR
76,81, A3 570.. . 156
Fairclough v Swan Brewery Co Ltd [1912] AC Grescot v Green (1700) 91 ER 179 ... 107
565 ... 224, 227, 240, A7 Grigsby v Melville [1973] All ER 455; [1974] 1
Falco Finance v Gough (1998) WLR 80 ... 6, 184
unreported ... 229 Grossman v Hooper [2001] 3 EGLR 662 ... 69
Federated Homes Ltd v Mill Lodge Properties
Ltd [1980] 1 WLR 594 ... 201, 202, 210, 211, Haghighat (A Bankrupt), Re [2009] EWHC
212,218,219,221, A7 90 ...161
Ferrishurst Ltd v Wallcite Ltd [1999] Ch Hair v Gillman (2000) 80 P&CR 108 ... 184,
355...42 198, A6

viii Concentrate Land Law

 Table of cases

Halifax pic v Curry Popeck (A Firm) [2008] Hussein v Mehlman [1992] 2 EGLR 87... 89
EWHC 1692 ... 38 Hypo-Mortgage Services v Robinson [1997] 2
Hall v Ewin (1887) 37 Ch D 74 ... 110 FLR 422 ... 43
Halsall v Brizell [1957] 1 All ER 371... 203,
215,216,218, A7 International Drilling Fluids Ltd v Louisville
Hammersmith & Fulham LBC v Monk [1992] 1 Investments (Uxbridge) Ltd [1986] Ch
AC 478 ... 89 513 ... 102, A3
Hamp v Bygrave (1983) EGD 1000 ... 7, Al Inwards v Baker [1965] 2 QB 29 ... 173,174
Hansford v Jago [1921] 1 Ch 322 ... 188 Irvine’s Estate v Moran, Re (1992) 24 HLR 1,
QBD ... 100, A3
Harris v De Pinna (1886) 33 Ch D 238; 50 J P
486.. .182
Jackson v Jackson [1971] 1 WLR 1539 ... 159
Harris v Goddard [1983] 1 WLR 1203 ... 152, Javad v Aqil [1991] 1 All ER 243 ... 78
162
Jennings v Rice [2003] 1 P & CR 100; [2003] 1
Harrow LBC v Qazi [2004] 1 AC 983 ... 234
FCR 501 ... 174
Hatton v UK [2003] ECHR 338 ... 6
Jeune v Queens Cross Properties [1974] Ch
Haywood v Brunswick Permanent Benefit 97 ... 101
Building Society (1881) 8 QBD
Jones v Challenger [1961] 1 QB 176 ... 158
403 ... 206, A7
Jones v Kernott [2011] UKSC 52 ... 134,149
Hill v Tupper (1863) 2 H&C 121... 182,
198, A6 Jones v Morgan [2001] EWCA Civ 995 ... 224,
227, 228, 229, 240, A7, A8
Hodgson v Marks [1971] Ch 892 ... 42
Jones v Pritchard [1908] 1 Ch 630 ... 183
Holaw Ltd v Stockton Estates Ltd (2000) 81
P&CR 404 ... 195 Joyce v Barker Bros (1980) 40 P&CR 512... 148
Holland v Hodgson (1872) LR 7 CP 328 ... 7, Al
Keay v Morris Homes (West Midlands)
Holliday, Re [19811 Ch 405 ... 161 Ltd [2012] EWCA Civ 900; [2012] 1 WLR
Hollington Brothers Ltd v Rhodes [1951] 2 All 2855... 67
ER 487 ... 54, 58 Kelsey v Dodd (1881) 52 LJ Ch 34 ... 204
Hollins v Verney (1884) 13 QBD 304 ... 192 Kent v Kavanagh [2007] Chi... 189
Hooper v Sherman [1994] NPC 153 ... 69 Kettel & Ors v Bloomfold Ltd [2012] EWHC
Horsham Properties Group Ltd v Clark [2009] 1422 (Ch)... 184
1 WLR 1255 ... 234 Kinch v Bullard [1999] 1 WLR 423 ... 153, A5
Hounslow LBC v Minchinton (1997) 74 P&CR King, Re [1963] Ch 459 ... 109
221, CA... 118, 125
King v David Allen & Sons [19161 2 AC
Hounslow LBC v Twickenham Garden 54 ... 171, 175
Developments Ltd [1971] Ch 233 ... 170,
Kingsnorth Trust Ltd v Tizard [1986] 1 WLR
171, A5
783 ... 24, 25, 26, A2
Hua Chiao Commercial Bank Ltd v Chiaphua
Knightsbridge Estates Trust Ltd v Byrne
Industries Ltd [1987] AC 99 ... 108
[1939] Ch 441 ... 227, 228, 240, A7
Hughes v Cork [1994] EGCS 25 ... 119
Kreglinger v New Patagonia Meat & Cold
Hunt v Luck [1901] 1 Ch 45 ... 24, 26, A2 Storage Co Ltd [1914] AC 25 ... 228, 240, A8
Hunter v Babbage [1994] 2 FLR 806 ... 154, AS Kumar v Dunnimg [1989] QB 193 ... 213
Hunter v Canary Wharf Ltd [1997] AC
655.. . 183 Lace v Chantier [1944] KB 368 ... 76, 77, A2
Hurst v Picture Theatres Ltd [1915] 1 KB Lake v Craddock (1732) 3 P Wms
1 ... 170, A5 157 ... 149, AS

Table of cases ix
Table of cases

Lambeth LBC v Blackburn (2001) 92 P&CR Mayes v Mayes (1969)... 159

494.. .120 Medforth v Blake [2000] Ch 86 ... 238
LCC v Allen [1914] 3 KB 642 ... 207, 218 Melluish v BMI (No 3) Ltd [1996] AC 454 ... 7
Leigh v Jack (1879) 5 Ex D 264 ... 119,125 Mercantile Credit Co v Clarke (1996) 71 P&CR
Leigh v Taylor [1902] AC 157 ... 7,11, Al D18...236
Lemon v Webb (1895) AC 1... Al Mexfield Housing Co-operative Ltd v
Linklending v Bustard [2010] EWCA Civ Berrisford [2011] UKSC 52 ... 76, 78, A2
424 ... 43,46 Midland Bank Trust Co Ltd v Green [1981] AC
Lister v Lane [1893] 2 QB 212 ... 98, 111, A3 513 ... 25, 38, 56-7, 58, A2
Liverpool City Council v Irwin [1977] AC Mikeover Ltd v Brady [1989] 3 All ER
239.. . 183 618 ... 82, A3
Lloyds Bank pic v Rosset [1991] 1 AC Miles v Easter [1933] Ch 611... 209, 212
107 ... 43,47,130,134,141 Miller v Emcer Products [1956] Ch 304 ... 184
London & Blenheim Estates v Ladbroke Retail Mills v Silver [1991] Ch 271... 192
Parks Ltd [1994] 1 WLR 31... 181 Mirror Group (Holdings) Ltd, Re (1993) 65
London Borough Council of Islington v Green C&PR 252 ... 105
[2005] EWCA Civ 56 ... 84 Moffat v Kazana [1969] 2 QB 152 ... 8
London Diocesan Fund v Phithwa [2005] 1 Moncrieff v Jamieson [20071 UKHL 42 ... 184,
WLR 3956... 103 A6
Long v Tower Hamlets LBC [1998] Ch Moody v Steggles (1879) 12 Ch D 261 ... 182,
197...86 198, A6
Lyus v Prowsa Developments Ltd [1982] 1 Morley v Bird (1798) 3 Ves 628 ... 149
WLR 1044... 38 Morrells of Oxford Ltd v Oxford United
Football Club [2001] 1 Ch 459 ... 208
McClausland v Duncan Lawrie Ltd [1997] 1
WLR 38 ... 69, 72 Mortgage Corporation v Shaire [2001] Ch
743... 158
McDonald v McDonald and others [2016]
UKSC 28... 90 Mortgage Express v Lambert [2016] EWCA
Civ 555 ... 39, 42, 57
McDonald v Morley (1940) 101 P2d 690 ... 155
Moule v Garret (1872) LR 7 Ex 101 ... 105,108
Manchester CC v Pinnock [2010] 3 WLR
1441.. . 89,90, 234 Multiservice Bookbinding Co Ltd v Marden
[1979] Ch 84 ... 229, 240, A7
Manjang v Drammah (1990) 61 P&CR
194.. .186 Murphy v Gooch [2007] EWCA Civ 603; [2007]
2 FLR 934 ... 139
Marchant v Charters [1977] 1 WLR
1181 ...81, A3
National & Provincial Building Society v Lloyd
Marcroft Wagons Ltd v Smith [1951] 2 KB [19961 1 All ER 630 ... 233
496.. .81
National Car Parks Ltd v Trinity Development
Marquess of Zetland v Driver (1939) Ch Co (Banbury) Ltd [2002J 2 P & CR 18 ... 79
1.. . 210,211
National Provincial Bank Ltd v Ainsworth
Marten v Flight Refuelling Ltd [1962] Ch [1965] AC 1175... 172
115.. . 212
Nicholls v Lan [2006] EWHC 1255 (Ch)... 161
Martin v Martin (1987) 54 P&CR 238 ... 148
Nickerson v Barraclough [981] Ch 426 ... 186
Martin v Smith (1874) LR 9 Ex 50 ... 78
Nielson-Jones v Fedden [1975] Ch 222 ... 153,
Martinson v Clowes (1882) 21 Ch D 857 ... 235 155, A5
Matchmove Ltd v Dowding and Church [2016] Noakes & Co Ltd v Rice [1902] AC 24 ... 228,
EWCA Civ 1233 ... 70 241

x Concentrate Land Law

 Table of cases

Norris v Checksfield [1991] 1 WLR 1241 ... 81 Post Office v Aquarius Property Ltd [1987]
North Eastern Properties Ltd v Coleman & 1 All ER 1055... 99, 111, A3
Quinn Conveyancing [2010| EWCA Civ 277; Powell v Hemsley [1909] 2 Ch 252 ... 206
[2010] 3 All ER 528 ... 68 Powell v McFarlane (1977) 38 P&CR
Nunn v Dalrymple (1990) 59 P&CR 231... 81 452... 117,119, 126, A4
Proudfoot v Hart (1890) 25 QBD 42 ... 97, 99
Oakley v Boston [1976] QB 270 ... 193 Prudential Assurance v London Residuary
O’Brien v Robinson [1973] AC 912... 100, A3 Body [1992] 2 AC 386 ... 78, 86, 93, A2
Old Grovebury Manor Farm Ltd v W Seymour Pryce v McGuiness [1966] Qd R 591 ... 186
Plant Sales & Hire Ltd (No 2) [1979] 1 WLR Purchase v Lichfield Brewery Co [1915] 1 KB
1397... 102 184 ... 106
Orgee v Orgee [1997] EGCS 152 ... 174 Pye (JA) (Oxford) Ltd v Graham [2003] 1 AC
Orme v Lyons [2012] EWHC 3308 (Ch)... 193 347 ... 115,117,119,121,125,126, A3
Oun v Ahmad [2008] EWHC 545 (Ch); [2008] 2
P & CR D7 ... 68 Quick v Taff-Ely BC [1986] QB 821 ... 100,
111, A3
P&A Swift Investments v Combined English
Stores Group pic [1989] AC 632 ... 203, 207, Rainbow Estates Ltd v Tokenhold Ltd [1999]
216,218, A7 Ch 64 ...101
P&S Platt v Crouch [2004] 1 P&CR 242 ... 190, Ravenseft Properties Ltd v Davstone
191 (Holdings) Ltd [1980] QB 12 ... 98, 111, A3
Palk v Mortgage Services Funding pic [1993] Record v Bell [1991] 1 WLR 853 ... 69
Ch 330... 235, 236, 241 Reeve v Lisle [1902] AC 461... 227, 241, A7
Paragon Finance v Nash [2002] WLR Regency Villas Title Ltd and others v Diamond
685.. .229 Resorts (Europe) Ltd and another [2018]
Parker v British Airways Board [1982] QB UKSC 57 ... 182, 183, 184, 199
1004 .. .8, 11, Al Regis Property Co Ltd v Dudley [1959] AC
Parker-Tweedale v Dunbar Bank pic [1991] Ch 370 ... 97, 99
12.. .236 Regis Property Co Ltd v Redman [1956] 2 QB
Pascoe v Turner [1979] 1 WLR 431... 176 612... 183,199
Patel v Pirabakaran [2006] EWCA Civ Renals v Cowlishaw (1878) 9 Ch D
685.. .89 125 ... 209, 210
Pavlou (A Bankrupt), Re [1993] 1 WLR Rhone v Stephens [1994] 2 AC 310 ... 203, 214,
1046 ... 149, 154, 159 215,219
Payne v Cardiff RDC [1932] 1 KB 241... 235 Roake v Chadha [1984] Ch 40 ... 211, 213, 219
Payne v Webb (1874) LR 19 Eq 26 ... 149 Rodway v Landy [2001] Ch 703 ... 139
Pembury v Lamdin [1940] 2 All ER Roe v Siddons (1888) 22 QBD 224 ... 182
434 ... 99, A3 Rogers v Hosegood [1900] 2 Ch 388 ... 207, 210
Penn v Wilkins (1974) 236 EG 203 ... 190 Ropaigealach v Barclays Bank pic [1999] 1 QB
Pereira (J) Fernades SA v Mehta [2006] EWHC 263 ... 233
813.. . 68 Ropemaker Properties Ltd v Noonhaven Ltd
Pettitt v Pettitt [1970] AC 777 ... 134 [1989] 2 EGLR 50 ... 92
Phipps v Pears [1965] 1 QB 76 ... 183, 198 Royal Bank of Scotland pic v Etridge (No 2)
Pink v Lawrence (1977) 36 P&CR 98 ... 149, A5 [2002] 2 AC 773 . .. 222, 224, 230, 231, 241
Pitt v PHH Asset Management Ltd [1994] 1 Rugby School (Governors) v Tannahill [1935]
WLR 327 ... 67 1 KB 87... 91

Table of cases xi
Table of cases
4r*4r**^*^-
Russell v Archdale [1964] Ch 38 ... 210 Street v Mount ford [1985] AC 809 ... 75, 76, 77,
Rye v Rye [1962] AC 496 ... 190 79, 81, 93, A2
Stribling v Wickham (1989) 2 EGLR 35 ... 80
St Marylebone Property Co v Tesco Stores Stuart v Joy [1904] 1 KB 362 ... 108
(1988) 2 Ch 40 ... 92 Suggitt v Suggitt [2012J... 173
Samuel v Jarrah Timber and Wood Paving Swansborough v Coventry (1832) 9 Bing
Corporation Ltd [1904] AC 323 ... 227,241, A7 305...187
Scala House District Properties v Forbes
[1974] QB 575... 91 Target Home Loans Ltd v Clothier [1994] 1 All
Scott v Southern Pacific Mortgages Ltd [2014] ER 439 ... 233
3 WLR 1163 ... 44, 66 Taylor Fashions Ltd v Liverpool Victoria
Shami v Shami [2012] EWHC 664 (Ch)... 40 Trustees Co Ltd [1982] QB 133 ... 173
Shepherd Homes v Sandham (No 2) [1971] 2 Taylor v Hamer [2003] 1P&CRDG6...7
All ER 1267 ... 206 Tecbild Ltd v Chamberlain (1969) 20 P&CR
Silven Properties Ltd v Royal Bank of Scotland 633, CA ... 117, 118, 126
pic [2004] 1 WLR 997 ... 236 Tehidy Minerals v Norman [1971] 2 QB
Sledmore v Dalby (1996) 72 P&CR 196... 174 528 ... 193
Small v Oliver & Saunders (Developments) Ltd Thamesmead Town Ltd v Allotey [1998] 37
[2006] EWHC 1293 (Ch); [2006] 23 EG 164 EG 161... 215
(CS)... 211,213 Thomas v Sorrell (1673) Vaugh
Smith & Snipes Hall Farm Ltd v River Douglas 330.. .168
Catchment Board [1949] 2 KB 500 ... 207, Thompson v Foy [2010] 1 P&CR 308 ... 44
216,219
Thorner v Major & Others [2009] UKHL 18;
Smith v Lawson (1997) 74 P&CR 34 ... 118 [2009] 3 All ER 945 ... 70,173, 176
Smith v Marrable (1843) 11 M & W 5... 97,99 Thursby v Plant (1668) 1 Wms Saund
Sookraj v Samaroo [2004] UKPC 50 ... 66 237.. .104
South of England Dairies Ltd v Baker [1906] Toomes v Consent (1745) 3 Atk 261... 227
2 Ch 631... 110 Tootal Clothing Ltd v Guinea Properties
Southwood Housing Co-operative Ltd v Walker Management Ltd (1992) 64 P&CR
& Others [2015] EWHC 1615 (Ch)... 78 452 ... 68, 72
Sovmots Investments v Secretary of State for Tophams Ltd v Earl of Sefton [1967] 1 AC
the Environment [1979] AC 144 ... 190 50 ... 214
Spencer’s Case (1583) 5 Co Rep 16a ... 106, Tse Kwok Lam v Wong Chit Sen [1983] 1 WLR
107,108, A3 1349 ...234, 235
Spiro v Glencrown Properties Ltd [1991] Tulk v Moxhay (1848) 2 Ph 774 ... 110, 202,
Ch 237 ... 70 203, 206, 214, 218, 220, A7
Stack v Dowden [2007] UKHL 17; [2007] 2 AC
432 ... 135,141,149 Union of London & Smith’s Bank Ltd’s
Stanhope v Haworth (1886) 3 TLR 34 ... 92 Conveyance, Re [1933] Ch 611... 212
State Bank of India v Sood [1997] Ch 276 ... 40 United Bank of Kuwait pic v Sahib [1997]
Staves & Staves v Leeds CC (1990) 23 HLR Ch 107... 86
107...100
Stockholm Finance Ltd v Garden Holdings Inc Verrall v Great Yarmouth BC [1981] QB
[1995] NPC 162 ... 43 202 ... 171,176
Strand Securities v Caswell [1965] Ch 958, Virdi v Chana [2008] EWHC 2901 (Ch); [2008]
CA ... 43, 47 All ER (D) 40 (Dec)... 184

xii Concentrate Land Law

 Table of cases

Wallis’s Cayton Bay v Shell-Mex and BP [1975] Williams v Hensman (1861) 1 J&H 546 ... 144,
QB 94 ... 119 150, A5
Walsh v Lonsdale (1882) 21 Ch D 9 ... 67, 75, Williams v Usherwood (1982) P&CR
76, 85, 86, 93,194, A2 735... 120
Ward v Kirkland [1967] Ch 194 ... 189 Williams v Williams [1976] 3 WLR 494 ... 158
Warnborough Ltd v Garmite Ltd [2004] 1 Wilson v Rosenthal (1906) 22 TLR 233 ... 97,
P&CR D18 ... 227 101
Watts v Stewart [2016] EWCA Civ 1247 ... 81 Winter Garden Theatre (London) Ltd v
Waverley BC v Fletcher [1996] QB 334 ... 8,12 Millennium Productions Ltd [1948] AC
Webb v Paternoster (1619) 2 Rolle 143 ... 170 173 ... 167, 170,176
Webbs Lease, Re [1951] Ch 808 ... 186 Wishart v Credit & Mercantile pic [2015]
EWCA Civ 655... 239
Weston v Lawrence Weaver Ltd [1961] 1 QB
402...197 Wong v Beaumont Property Trust Ltd [1965] 1
QB 173 ... 186, 199
Wheeldon v Burrows (1879) 12 Ch 31... 179,
180,182, 185,187,188, 190,191, 199 Wood v Leadbitter (1845) 13 M&W 838 ... 170
Wheeler v JJ Saunders Ltd [1996] Ch Wood v Waddington [2014] EWHC 1358 ... 190
19 ... 188,189 Wright v Gibbons (1949) 78 CLR 313 ... 154
White v City of London Brewery Co (1889) 42 Wright v Macadam [1949] 2 KB 744 ... 190,
Ch D 237 ... 234 199
Wilford’s Estate, Re (1879) 1 Ch D 267 ... 156 Wright v Robert Leonard Developments Ltd
Wilkes v Spooner [1911] 2 KB 473 ... 25, 26 [1994] NPC 49 ... 68, 73
Wilkinson v Kerdene Ltd [2013] EWCA Civ 44; Wrotham Park Estate Co Ltd v Parkside
[2013] 1 P&CR D46 ... 215 Homes Ltd [1974] 1 WLR 798 ... 207, 210,
219, 220
William Aldred’s Case (1610) 77 ER 816 ... 182
William’s & Glyn’s Bank Ltd v Boland [1981] Yaxley v Gotts [2000] Ch 162 ... 22, 70, 73
AC 487, HL ... 39, 47, A2, A4
Yeung v Patel [2014] EWCA Civ 481, 186

Table of cases xiii

 Table of legislation

UK Statutes s 2(4)... A2
Access of Neighbouring Land Act 1992 ... 183 s 2(5)(ii)... 209
Administration of Justice Act 1970 ... 224, A8 s 3(1)... 55
s 36... 233 s 4... 51,55, 57
Administration of Justice Act 1973 ... 233, A8 s 4(5)... 56, 238, A2
s 4(6)... 55, 56, 88, 195, 209, A2
Civil Aviation Act 1982 ... 5 s 4(8)... 56, A2
Civil Partnership Act 2004 ... 37,54 517.. . A2
Coal Industry Act 1994 ... 6 s 17(1)... 55
Common Law Procedure Act 1852 Land Registration Act 1925 ... 31, 44, 45
s 210... 90 s 75... 121
Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act Land Registration Act 2002 ... 31, 32, 41,42,
2002.. . 65 45, 76, 113, 114, 115, 116, 120, 121, 127, A4
Consumer Credit Act 2006 ... 229 s 1 ... 32
Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act s 2 ... 33
1999 ... 5,54,203, 205, 214 s 3... 33
s 1(1)... 205 s 4... 29,30, 33, 62, 71, 88
Criminal Law Act 1977... 233 s 4(l)(c)... 86
56.. .92 s 4(l)(g)... 225
Enterprise Act 2002 ... 160 s 4(8)... 33
s 6 ... 29, 33, 62, 71
Family Law Act 1996... 37,54,135, A2 s 7 ... 29, 34, 71
Financial Services and Markets Act s 9... 34
2000... 229
s 10... 34
Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) Act 511.. .34
2018...100 s12... 34
Human Rights Act 1998 ... 125,169 s 23(l)(a)... 224, 225
s1...41 s 26 ... 130, 140
s 27... 21, 29, 30, 62, Al
Infrastructure Act 2015 ... 6
s 27(1)... 34, 71
Insolvency Act 1986
s 27(2)... 34
s 283A... 160
s 27(2)(a)... 71, 87
s 305(2)... 160
s 27(2)(b)(i)... 86
s 335A ... 144,145, 160, 162
s27(2)(d)... 194, 195
s 33SA(3)... 160,161
s 27(2)(f)... 225, 226, 239
Land Charges Act 1972... 35,50,51,53, 54, s 28(1)... 38
56, 57, 58,120 s 29 ... 88, 195, A7
s 2... 54 s 29(1)... 30, 38, 208, Al, A2

xiv Concentrate Land Law

 Table of legislation

s 29(2)... 30, 38, 208, Al, A2 Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 ... 96,97, A3
s29(2)(b)... 110 s 11... 100,101
s 32 ... 30, 37,42, 45, 88, 195, 208, Al sll(l)... A3
s 33... 37 sll(2)(a)... A3
s 37 ... 37 ss 12-14 ... 100,101
s 38... 36, 42,45,195, Al s 17... 101
s 40... 30, 39, Al, A4 Landlord and Tenant Act 1988
s 44 ... 40 s 1(6)... 102
s 48... 239 Landlord and Tenant (Covenants) Act
s 62... 35 1995... 96, 97, 103-4, 112, A3
s 65 ... 45 s 3 ... 106,107, 108, A3
s 66 ... 32 s3(5)... 110
s 71 ...34 s 3(6)... 106, 108
s96... 121 s5... 104
s 103... 31, 45 s 6...108,109
s 116. ..42, 174, A6 s 8... 108
s132 ... A2 s11...104,108
Sch 1 ... 35 s 16... 104
para 1 ... 41 s 17 ... 97, 103,105
para 2 ... 41 s 18 ... 97,103,105
para 3 ... 41
s 19 ... 97, 103, 105
Sch3.. .34,35,42
s 20 ... 97,103
para 1 ... 29, 30, 42, 88
para 2 ... 29, 30, 38, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 46, s 22... 102
47, 88, 123, 175, 195, 208, Al, A2, A4, A6 s 23 ... 107,108, 109
para 3 ... 29, 30, 44, 195 s 24 ... 104, 107, 108
Sch 4 ... 45 s 24(4)... 109
Sch 6... A4 s 25 ... 103
para 1 ... 124 Law of Property Act 1925 ... 97,103,130,131
para 1(1)... 121, A4
si... 10,65, 131
para 1(4)... 122
para 2 ... 122 s 1(1) ... 3, 22, 63
para 5 ... 122 s l(l)(a) ... 62, 63, 64
para 6 . .. 122 s l(l)(b)... 75, 76, 77
para 8 ... 122 s 1(2)... 3, 15, 16, 19, 20, 22, 36, 181, A2
para 9 ... 124
s l(2)(a)... 19, 20,194
para 11 ... 121
s l(2)(b)... 20
Sch 8... 45
s l(2)(c)... 19, 20, 224, 225
Sch 12 ... 45
para 20 ... 105 s l(2)(d)... 20
Landlord and Tenant Act 1927 s l(2)(e)... 19, 20
s18... 100 s 1(3)... 15, 22, A2
s 19(l)(a)... 96, 97,102 s 1(6) ... 145, 147, A4
s 19(1A)... 102 s 2 ... 30, 39, 51, 53, 57, 135, Al, A2, A4
sl9(l)(a)...A3 s 14 ... 138

Table of legislation xv
Table of legislation
********-
s 27 ... 30, 39,51,53,57,135, Al, A2, A4 s 196(4)... 153
s 30 ...132,156,157 s 198 ... 51,53, 88,195, 209, A2
s 34 ... 147 s 199(1)... 54
s 36 ... 144,145,147,150,152 s 205 ... 3,190, A2
s 36(2) ... 150,151,152, AS s 205(l)(ix)... 5
S40...67 s 205(l)(xix)... 64, 86
s 52 ... 15, 20, 61,71,86,87,194, Al, A2 s 205(l)(xxvii)... 77
s 52(2)... 71 s 205(l)(xxix)... 132
s 52(2)(d)... 86 Law of Property Act 1969
s 53(l)(a)... 194,226 s 23 ... 24, 52
s 53(l)(b)... 130,133 s 24... 55
s 53(l)(c)... 87,136,153, 226 s 25... 55
s 53(2) ... 130,134 s 28... 217
s 54(2)... 86 Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions)
s 56...203,204 Act 1989... 64
s 62 ... 7,168,179,180,185,189,190,191, s 1... 20, 61, 62,87,194, Al, A2, A9
196,213, Al, A6 s 1(2)... 71, 86
s 62(4)... 191 s 2 ... 21, 61, 62, 67,68, 69, 70, 72, 84, 86,194,
s 77... 105 226, A2
s 78 ... 210,211,216,218,219, A7 s 2(2)... 68
s 79 ... 104,108,207,208, 214, A7 s 2(4)... 68
s84(1)... 217 s 2(5) ... 21,67
s 85 ... 224,225 s 2(5)(a)... 84
s 86 ... 224, 225 Leasehold Property (Repairs) Act 1938 ... 91,
s 87... 24 97,101, A3
s 91... 237,241 Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of
Offenders Act 2012
s 91(2)... 236
s144... 116
s 97... 238
Limitation Act 1980 ... 8, 124
s 101... 224,234,235,237,238
s 15... 115,120
s 103 ... 224, 234,235,237
s 15(1)... 120
s 104 ... 235
s 17... 115,120
s105...224, 236
s32(1)... 118
s109...224,237
Sch 1
s 136... 203,216 para 8(4)... 119, A4
s141...109
s142 ...108 Matrimonial Proceedings and Property Act
s 146... 91 1970... 135
s 146(2)... 91 Prescription Act 1832 ... 179,180, 185, 192,
s 146(4)... 90 193
s149... 77 s3... 194
s149(6)... 78 Protection from Eviction Act 1977 ... 83
s 196(3)... 153 s 2... 89,90, 91

xvi Concentrate Land Law

 Table of legislation
. . % * 4; Jfc
Rentcharges Act 1977 ... 33 s 11... 129,130,137, A4
Rights to Light Act 1959 ... 194 s 11(1)... 137
Settled Land Act 1925 ... 129,130,131,132 sll(2)... A4
Supreme Court Act 1981 s 12 ... 129, 130, 138, 139, A4
s 37... 238 s 12(l)-(2) ... A4
s 13 ... 129,130,138
Treasure Act 1996 ... 8, Al s 13(1)... 136
Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act
s 13(4)... 139
2007... 90
s13(7)... 139
Trustee Act 1925
s 14 ... 129, 130,139,144, 145, 157, 158,160,
s 34 ... 145, 147
163, A4, A5
s 34(2) ... A4 s 15... 129,130,144,145, 157, 158,160, 163,
s 36 ... 135, 136 A4, A5
s39...151 s 15(4)... 160
s 40... 135,136,151 s 16 ... 130,140
s 41... 135 s 19 ... 135,136, 151
Trustee Act 2000 Sch 2 ... 133
s 1(1)... 137
Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees UK Secondary Legislation
Act 1996 ... 63, 128, 129, 130, 131,132, 133, Mortgage Credit Directive Order 2015 (SI
138, 140, 142,143, 144, 147,157, 158, A4, All 2015/910)... 230
s1 ... 131, 133 Treasure (Designation) Order 2002 (SI
s2... 131 2002/2666)... 8, Al
s 3 ... 132
European Legislation
s4... 133
s5... 133 Treaty on the Functioning of the European
Union
s6... 129
Art 101 (ex EC Art 81) ... 229
s 6(1)... 136, 137, A4
s 6(3)... 136 International Legislation
s 6(5)... 137 European Convention on Human Rights
s 6(6)... 137 1950... 121
s 7 ... 129, 162 Art 1... 161
s8... 129 Art 6 ... 90
s8(l)... 137 Art 8 ... 6, 89, 90,161,162, 234
s 9 ... 137 Protocol 1
s 9(1)... 136 Art 1... 41, 115, 125, 234

Table of legislation xvii

Introduction: proprietary
rights

Issues discussed in this chapter may be examined as self-contained topics, specifically those
relating to the definition of land. Typical problem questions may involve:

• assessing how far a person's rights over a piece of land extend, where, for example, there
has been an invasion of airspace or removal of vegetation;
• assessing whether a purchaser can insist upon the return of numerous items removed from
a property between exchange of contracts and completion of sale (ie whether the items
removed were fixtures or chattels);
• assessing who has superior rights over items found on land.

(Note that these issues may also form part of another question. Take guidance from your own
course as to where these issues may appear in a question.)
Depending upon the nature of your course, you may be required to explore the concepts of
proprietary and personal rights and their distinguishing characteristics. Otherwise, much of the
information contained in this chapter may be treated as foundation material: not specifically
examinable by itself, but information which you must understand in order to comprehend how
land law works.
Key facts
*^4?***^'

• Proprietary rights govern your ability to use and enjoy both land you physically possess and
land physically possessed by others.

• Proprietary rights are rights in the land itself which makes them capable of enduring
changes of ownership to the land.

• Whilst technically all land is owned by the Crown, holding an estate in land, and in particular
a freehold estate that gives you rights to possess, enjoy, and use the land forever, is
tantamount to actual ownership.

• Holding an estate in land gives you rights to possess, enjoy, and use the land beyond just
the physical surface area of drat land.

• Apart from an estate in land, the other type of proprietary rigtit that exists is an interest in
land.

• Whilst an estate gives you a slice of time during which you are entitled to use and enjoy
land you physically possess, an interest [Link] you -grts to use and enjoy land physically
possessed by another.

• Proprietary rights can be either legal or ecuhab'e in status.

2 Concentrate Land Lavi

 Chapter overview
* ******

f"' (Tx/^^V^W

Key characteristic: the Reasons for such durability

Proprietary rights: rights potential to endure include:
governing people's ability changes of ownership to • the uniqueness of land
to use and enjoy land the land over which they • to maintain marketability
are exercised of land

Land is defined in s 205 LPA 1925 and includes:

I
• physical surface area and below, subject Reason why some rights
to statutory exceptions exercised over land do not
• lower, but not upper airspace: Bernstein of Leigh have proprietary status: to
(Baron) v Skyviews & General Ltd 11978] ensure land does not
• buildings and fixtures on the land, but not chattels become inalienable

I
I All land is technically owned by the Crown L
~ ■[ Derives from the 'doctrine of tenures' |

I ~
A person claiming land ownership
merely enjoys a proprietary right over
the land, perhaps so extensive it is
tantamount to absolute ownership

■I Two key types of proprietary rights:

Estates: determine the extent to which a person interests: determine extent to which
may possess and enjoy his 'own' land, typically a person may use and enjoy the land
to the exclusion of all others. The two most of another, falling short of exclusive
significant are freehold and leasehold possession
t —

I
| Status of proprietary rights: |
I J

Legal
• if fall into s 1(1) or (2) LPA1925: and Otherwise equitable (provided
• certain formalities are met when created certain formalities are met)

Chapter 1 Introduction: proprietary rights 3

Introduction: proprietary rights
********

Introduction: proprietary rights

Property law concerns the regulation and management of people’s enjoyment and relation­
ships with particular things. The extent of the ability to enjoy and use property, and rights
and remedies stemming from this, differ depending upon the nature of the property in
question.
Where the property in question is land, rights governing people’s ability to use and enjoy
the land are known as proprietary rights.

A broad spectrum
Proprietary rights can:
• vary from being very extensive, for example the ability to use and possess land to the
exclusion of everyone else (tantamount to ownership), to quite narrow, for example a
right to fish;
• relate to what you can, or cannot, do over land that you physically possess, for example
the ability to carry on a business on the land, or to land physically possessed by another,
for example a right of way or an ability to restrict building;
• be numerous over one piece of land: a right for a person to physically possess it; a right
for a person to walk over it; a right for a person to restrict building on it etc.

A distinctive nature
As seen as rights in the land itself (in rem), a proprietary right is not only enforceable against
the person who originally granted it to you, but also, in certain circumstances, enforceable
against any other person who may come to the land over which that right is exercised. Where
exercise of the right is denied, remedy may extend beyond mere damages to compensate for
value/loss of use, allowing the holder to seek action to recover the actual land/use of land.

Why such enduring enforceability?

Land is a unique commodity: no one piece of land is the same. It’s also generally expensive.
A person who enjoys a right over a piece of land wants the assurance that it will not be lost
when that land changes ownership. Without such assurance, land could lose its marketabil­
ity, become economically stagnant, and consequently lose its value.

Striking a balance
Equally, if a piece of land became overburdened by too many proprietary rights being exer­
cised over it, such rights being capable of surviving changes of ownership to that land, it
may become an unattractive investment. Consequently, some rights, although exercised in

4 Concentrate Land Law

 'Ownership' of 'land'
■ <: rk rk rk rk*>k *

relation to land, are not given proprietary status. Licences are an example. They remain,
for most, personal rights, enforceable only against the person who granted it to you and not
against the land itself.

Some licences have been found to be enforceable against third parties and thus appear to have
proprietary status. This is considered in more detail in chapter 11. Be prepared to make this link if
required to examine the characteristics of proprietary, as opposed to, personal rights.

'Ownership' of 'land'
• Technically, all land is owned by the Crown (see ’The history behind land ownership: the
doctrine of tenures’ as to how this came about).
• The most you could have over a piece of land is a proprietary right to physically pos­
sess, use, enjoy, and deal with the land to the exclusion of anyone else, known as an
estate.
• There are two key types of estate: the freehold and the leasehold (see ‘Estates or inter­
ests’ and chapters 5 and 6).
• The broadest is the freehold (the reasons for which are outlined later in this section).
A person holding a freehold estate is, in practical terms, seen as the owner of the land.
Their rights and relationship to the land that they physically possess are indistinguish­
able from that of an absolute owner.
• Where someone holds a freehold estate, giving them rights to possess and enjoy the land
tantamount to absolute ownership, the extent of those rights depends upon how land is
defined.
• A statutory definition has been given to ‘land’ in s 20S(l)(ix) Law of Property Act (LPA)
192S. This is further clarified in case law.

In summary, where a person has a right to possess and enjoy a piece of land by virtue of hold­
ing a freehold estate, tantamount to making him the owner of the land, his rights extend to:

• the physical surface area of the land;

• the lower airspace above the physical surface area necessary for his ordinary use and
enjoyment of that land. Any invasion of this lower airspace is prima facie actionable
as a trespass: Anchor Brewhouse Developments v Berkley House (Docklands Develop­
ments) Ltd (1987), with a remedy of an injunction where damages would not be ade­
quate. This is qualified by statute, for example the Civil Aviation Act 1982, which allows
for aircraft to pass over land at a reasonable height, without amounting to an actionable
trespass. A landowner has no claim to trespass where there is interference with his
upper airspace, ie that airspace not necessary for his ordinary use and enjoyment of the
land: Bernstein of Leigh (Baron) v Skyviews & General Ltd [1978]. lb allow otherwise

Chapter 1 Introduction: proprietary rights 5

'Ownership' of 'land'

would create absurdities and stifle the ability of the general public to take advantage of
developments in science regarding airspace (eg satellites);

Q| f-rv~ tsul-r-a. a.r'-ks?

Whilst there may be no claim in trespass, an alternative action may lie under Art 8 Human Rights
Act 1988. See, for example, the case of Hatton v UK (2003) which concerned night flights around
Heathrow Airport.

• the ground below the surface area (Grigsby v Melville 11974]), including mines and minerals,
although this is qualified by various statutes, for example the Coal Industry Act 1994 which vests
ownership of coal in the Coal Authority;

Q| L-rrIrirj fvr~ carles?

Read the case of Bocardo SA v Star Energy UK Onshore Ltd (2010] which illustrates the
application of the depth of ownership principles by the Supreme Court. Recent debates around
fracking and potential trespass claims led to new legislation: infrastructure Act 2015. Read
related articles.

• buildings or parts of buildings found on the land, whether the division is vertical or
horizontal;
• wild plants growing on the land. Commercially grown plants are not considered part of
the land and belong to those who planted them;
• dead wild animals killed on the land, irrespective of who killed them. Living wild ani­
mals do not belong to anyone, although a landowner has a right to kill them whilst they
are on his land, subject to any statutory protection they might enjoy;
• the soil over which water flows. Where two plots of land are separated by a river,
each plot owner owns the soil up to the middle of the river. As regards any fish that
may be found in these waters, where the water is non-tidal the owner of the land has
exclusive fishing rights, subject to him having granted this right to others. Where
the water is tidal, the public has the right to fish up to the point of ebb and flow of
the tide;
• some items found on the land. Whether the landowner’s rights extend to such items
depends upon the answer to a series of questions, as outlined in Figure 1.1;
• incorporeal hereditaments. These are those intangible rights that benefit the land in
question, for example a right of way or an ability to restrict the neighbouring land­
owner from building on his land;
• fixtures found on the land. Where a chattel has become attached to the land, or a build­
ing on it, it can become part of the land itself changing from being a mere chattel to a
fixture. Whether this is the case will depend upon the degree of annexation the object

6 Concentrate Land Law

 'Ownership' of 'land'
Jfc *

has to the land, or building on it, and the purpose of its annexation: Holland v Hodgson
(1872). The label that parties give to the object is not conclusive of its status: Melluish v
BMI (No 3) Ltd [1996].

The degree of annexation test: the greater the degree of annexation, the more
likely the object is a fixture. Absence of any annexation at all would generally be
decisive in making the object a chattel, unless the object is one that, by reason
of its own weight, does not require any annexation: Elitestone Ltd v Morris
[1997]. However, this test must now be used in conjunction with the purpose of
annexation test, which today is the dominant test out of the two: Hamp v Bygrave
[1983],
The purpose of the annexation test: consider the purpose for which the object
has been annexed to the land. If annexation is merely to enjoy the object as
a chattel, it will remain a chattel: Leigh v Taylor [1902], If it is to make an
improvement to the property itself, the chattel will become a fixture: D'Eyncourt
v Gregory (1866). The purpose of annexation must be judged objectively (Dean v
Andrews [1986]), although subjective intentions of the person who annexed the
object may be persuasive.

Q) Lrrk’by fty~ **a.r'lcs?

The case of Botham v tsb Bank pic (1997) highlighted useful considerations to be taken into
account when determining the status of an object, including:
• whether the object is part of the overall design of the building;
• the moveability of the object: where moved regularly, more likely a chattel;
• the lifespan of the object: where limited, more likely a chattel;
• the damage caused to the land, or object itself, when moved: contrast the decision in
Elitestone ltd v Morris [1997] with the more recent decision of Caddick v whitsand Bay
Holiday Park Ltd (20151;
• the type of person who installed/attached the object to the land: where a builder, more likely a
fixture; where a contractor, more likely a chattel.
Such considerations can be applied when answering exam problem questions. An interesting insight
into how a court approaches the two tests and applies them can be seen from reading the judgments
in the case of Berkley v Poulett [1977],

The significance of determining the status of an object often arises upon the sale of land
where fixtures are deemed to convey with the land: s 62 LPA 1925. A purchaser is entitled to
receive anything that is a fixture at ‘exchange of contracts’ (or perhaps earlier where land is
inspected: Taylor v Hamer [2003]), subject to any contrary agreement.

Chapter 1 Introduction: proprietary rights 7

The history behind land ownership: the doctrine of tenures
********:

An examiner would want to see good use of case law to enhance your arguments as to whether
an item is a fixture or a chattel. Draw appropriate comparisons and use the legal reasoning to
demonstrate you understand the factors that Influence a court. Know the case law that you have
covered on your course.

Ownership of items found on the land

Figure 1.1 The ownership of items found on the land
If yes, his rights to the item are superior to all others: Moffat v
Can the true owner of Kazana (1969). He has 6 years, from the date another assumes
the item be located? rights over the item inconsistent with his, in which to claim the
item found: Limitation Act 1980.

what amounts to treasure is governed by the Treasure Act

| is the item treasure? 1996, enhanced by the Treasure (Designation) Order 2002.
A coroner's inquest will determine the issue and items found
to be treasure will belong to the Crown.

Was the item found?

I I
| Embedded in/attached to the ground | | On the surface of the ground |

Prima facie the item belongs to the finder (although note the
Prima facie the item belongs to the exception where the finder is trespassing) unless the freehold
freehold estate owner: Waverly BC
v Fletcher 11996). estate owner has manifested an intention to exercise control
over the land and items that maybe found upon it: Parker V
British Airways Board (19821.

The history behind land ownership: the

doctrine of tenures
The fact that, technically, all land is owned by the Crown stems from the Norman Conquest
in 1066 when the king, William the Conqueror, declared himself as owner of all the land in
England. A system of landholding developed whereby the king would allow people to use and
occupy his land in return for the performance of certain services. Ownership of the land was

8 Concentrate Land Law

 Proprietary rights under the microscope
> £ & * ** *

never actually transferred to such persons. Such holders of the land were known as tenants
and they in turn would allow others to use and occupy their land in return for services to
them. This was known as subinfeudation. A feudal system of land ownership thus arose. The
nature of the services provided by the tenant to his immediate lord differed depending upon
the nature of the tenure in question: see Table 1.1.

Table 1.1 The doctrine of tenures

Free tenure Unfree tenure

Characteristic—services provided to the Characteristic—services provided to the

immediate lord were fixed and certain immediate lord were not fixed as to their nature
and duration

Types Types
• Chivalry • Villeinage
• Socage • Customary
• Spiritual

Since 1926, there has been only one form of tenure: free and common socage or freehold
as it is now known. The tenure exists in name only. The freehold tenant need not provide
an immediate lord with services. Indeed, almost all freehold tenants hold the land directly
from the Crown, the feudal pyramid of landholding having disappeared. The Crown still
technically owns the land. Someone who claims ownership of land through having a freehold
actually merely enjoys a proprietary right over the land that is so extensive it is tantamount
to actual ownership.

Proprietary rights under the microscope

There are two key ways in which proprietary rights may be classified:

Estates or interests
An estate is a more extensive proprietary right than an interest. The freehold estate and the
leasehold estate are the two most important. Whilst discussed further in their relevant chap­
ters (chapters 5 and 6 respectively), the following key points about estates can be made here:
• holding an estate in a piece of land gives you a ‘slice of time’ during which you are enti­
tled to possess and enjoy that land.
• the ‘slice of time' given to you is determined by the type of estate that you hold:
- with a freehold estate (known technically as the fee simple absolute in possession),
the slice of time is perpetual. It will only come to an end if the estate holder dies
with no heirs (when the estate reverts to the Crown bona vacantia. This is the most

Chapter 1 introduction: proprietary rights 9

proprietary rights under the microscope
********
obvious indication today that land is still owned by the Crown). This is why someone
who holds a legal freehold estate sees themselves as tantamount to the actual owner
of the land.
With a leasehold estate (known technically as term of years absolute), the slice of
time is fixed and the estate will come to an end when the time expires. It is therefore
the smaller of the two estates. (It is further inferior to a freehold estate since the
leasehold estate holder will be subject to more restrictions as to what he can and
cannot do over the land than a freehold estate holder.)
The system of holding land by virtue of an estate can create a hierarchy of estates over one
piece of land. For example, one piece of land could be subject to a freehold estate and one or
more leasehold estates. By dealing with land in these 'slices of time’ it is possible for people
to use land to make money; carving estates out of their own and selling them to others to
raise capital. (The precise status of an estate, where others exist in the same piece of land,
is dealt with in detail in chapter S.)
Whilst an estate determines the extent to which you can possess and enjoy your ‘own’ land,
an interest concerns rights you have over the land of another. Although interests may take on
a possessory character, possession will be restricted so that the estate holder of the land can
still use and enjoy the land for himself. It is for this reason that interests are more limited in
what they allow the holder to do than estates. However, they are no less important in the role
they play in governing people's relationships to land.

Legal or equitable
All proprietary rights will have either legal or equitable status. The types of proprietary
right that can be legal, where certain formalities have been met, are found in a closed list in
s 1 LPA 192S. Where such formalities are not met, the right may only exist in equity, but this
again will be dependent upon satisfaction of certain formalities, all of which are discussed in
more detail in chapter 2. (An example of a right that can have legal or equitable status is an
easement. The conditions that determine its status are explained in chapter 12.)
Despite being limited to those found in the s 1 LPA 192S list, legal rights are not insignifi­
cant. Those that are listed commonly arise over land and they include the most extensive of
the two types of proprietary rights: freehold and leasehold estates.
Other types of proprietary rights can only ever exist in equity, since their recognition as
proprietary rights stemmed from equity’s intervention in resolving the inadequacies of com­
mon law when dealing with disputes over land. A classic example, and one discussed in more
detail in chapter 13, is the restrictive covenant.

The status of a proprietary right as either legal or equitable Is discussed in more detail in chapter 2
and again in relation to specific rights in the relevant chapters. Be sure you understand how status
is determined.

10 Concentrate Land Law

 Key cases
St

(?) Key (MW

case Facts Principle

Bernstein of Flying a plane over land in order An owner of an estate in land has
Leigh (Baron) to take aerial photographs did not rights that extend only as far as the
v Skyviews & amount to a trespass of that land. tower airspace above the physical
General Ltd surface area of the land necessary
[1978] QB 479 for the ordinary use and enjoyment of
that land.

Botham vTSB The plaintiff owned a flat which was In deciding the issue of whether an
Bank pic (1997) mortgaged. When he fell into arrears item is a fixture or chattel, look beyond
73 [Link] D1 with the mortgage repayments, the the two key tests of degree and
bank sought possession and sold purpose of annexation (as discussed
the property. A question arose as to in "'Ownership" of "land"').
whether some of the contents of the
flat were fixtures, and thus part of the
security for the debt

D’Eyncourt v Despite being free-standing, marble Where evidence is produced that

Gregory (1866) statues of lions, garden seats, and objects have been positioned so as
LR 3 Eq 382 ornaments were held to be fixtures, to improve the overall architectural
and thus part of the land. design of a property, those objects
may become fixtures, even where
there is no degree of annexation.

Elitestone Ltd wooden bungalows, not themselves Even where there is no physical
V Morris [1997] attached to the land, rested on attachment to the land, an object
1 WLR 687 concrete pillars that were attached. could be a fixture where it is deemed
The bungalows were deemed to be to be used in situ and could not be
fixtures. removed without physical destruction.

Leigh v Taylor Tapestries attached to a wall of a Although physical attachment of

[19021 AC 157 building were held to be chattels. an object to the land might suggest
that object has become a fixture,
this may not be the case where such
attachment is purely so that the object
can be enjoyed.

Parker v British The plaintiff, a passenger at Heathrow The rights of the finder of an object
Airways Board Airport, found a gold bracelet on found on the surface of the ground
[1982] QB 1004 the floor of the executive lounge. He can only be displaced by the owner of
handed it in to an employee of the the land where the object was found
defendant requesting It be returned if the latter manifested an intention to
to him should no one claim the item. control the land and items found on it.
No one claimed the bracelet but the
defendant sold it and retained the
proceeds, it was held that the plaintiff
was entitled to damages.

Chapter 1 introduction: proprietary rights 11

Exam questions

Case Facts Principle

Waverley BC v The defendant, lawfully in a public Where an object is found in or

Fletcher [1996] park, unlawfully used a metal detector attached to land, the owner of that
QB 334 to detect a gold brooch buried in the land has better title to that object
ground, it was held that the council's than the finder.
rights to the brooch were superior to
the finder's.

(7) Ex an*
Problem question

Tim purchased the freehold estate of a property known as Nector House two weeks ago. upon
moving into the property he noticed that a water fountain had been removed from the garden and
a stained glass window had been removed from the dining room and replaced with normal glass.
TWo days ago, a postman picked up a valuable emerald necklace from under a bush as he walked
up the garden path to the door of Nector House. The true owner of the necklace cannot be found
and the postman has told Tim he is keeping it for himself. Tim has also discovered that branches
from his neighbour's willow tree hang over his land.
Advise Tim whether:

1. he can insist upon the return of the water fountain and the stained glass window;
2. he can require the postman to return the emerald necklace to him; and
3. he can cut off the overhanging branches from his neighbour's willow tree and use them to
make a basket.

Essay question

'Cuius est solum eius est usque ad coelum et ad inferos': he who owns land owns everything up to
the sky and down to the centre of the earth.
To what extent is this Latin phrase misleading today?

0^/i^ t^C'S'ir^K'o^S'
For an outline answer to this essay question, as well as multiple-choice questions and interac­
tive key cases, please visit the online resources.

12 Concentrate Land Law

 Exam questions
# ifc * *

C<rn(>e'*./-r"'a/-€' Q^As
■ For more questions and answers on land law, see the Concentrate Q&A: Land
Law by Rosalind Malcolm.
Go to the end of this book to view sample pages.
Ems

Chapter 1 introduction: proprietary rights 13

The distinction between legal
and equitable interests

The material covered in this chapter is unlikely to appear in a self-contained problem question.
Rather, it is pervasive material that forms the foundation upon which land law is built. Your
understanding of this material is therefore essential to your overall understanding of land law. You
will see that much of the material on formalities, and the creation of legal and equitable interests
in land, is repeated elsewhere in this book. Chapters devoted to specific interests repeat rules
outlined in this chapter and expand upon these where necessary. The enforcement of interests
against third parties in both registered and unregistered land, discussed in chapters 3 and 4
respectively, requires a consideration of the exact status of an interest when ascertaining which
rules to apply.
An essay question may focus on just the material covered in this chapter but it is more likely to be
combined with principles discussed elsewhere, for example the issue of notice and its role today
(link with chapters 3 and 4).
 Key facts

• The intervention of equity in land law can be seen in two key areas: the development of new
equitable interests in land, and the availability of equitable remedies to enforce interests in
land.

• Following the intervention of equity, interests in land may now have either legal or equitable
status.

• To be legal, the interest must be one listed under s 1(2) Law of Property Act 1925 (lpa
1925) and certain formalities must be met in its creation, notably being granted by deed
(s 52 LPA 1925). Where these formalities are not met, the interest may have equitable
status instead, but only where equity can find a specifically enforceable valid contract to
create the interest.

• All other interests in land can only ever be equitable (s 1(3) lpa 1925). to achieve equitable
status, formalities in creation of the interest must be met and these formalities will differ
depending upon the type of interest.

• The status of an interest in land as either legal or equitable traditionally determined the
rules of enforcement of that interest against third parties: legal interests bound all third
parties, whereas equitable interests would only bind third parties who were not bona fide
purchasers for value of a legal estate without notice.

• Today enforcement of interests in land against third parties is determined less by its status
as legal or equitable, and more upon concepts of registration.

• However, traditional rules of enforcement still play a minor role in unregistered land.

Chapter 2 The distinction between legal and equitable interests 15

 Chapter overview
******* •

Proprietary interests expanded with

the intervention of equity

Only if:
• listed in s 1(2) LPA 1925; and
Interests in land now fall into two • person granting the interest has
Legal
categories capacity to grant legal interests; and
• the grant satisfies formalities to make
it legal

-I Equitable includes:
• interests that have capacity to be
legal but fail to meet all requirements;
• agreements to grant interests that
have legal capacity;
• interests that have only ever been
recognised in equity

I
But only equitable if meet certain
Significance in the category into
which an interest falls: formalities which differ depending upon
the nature of the interest

Remedies! ■| Legal: damages available as of right

Equitable: equitable remedies

available at discretion of the court

I Enforcement I- J Historically L J Legal: binding on whole world I

i; Equitable: only binding upon a

person who is not a bona fide
ij purchaser for value of a legal
estate without notice

Depends generally upon rules

•j Today [- of registration but status still
significant in determining
which rules to apply

16 Concentrate Land Law

 The intervention of equity
:k ifc if; if; * *

The intervention of equity

The impact that equity has had on the development of land law cannot be underestimated
and is something that you must appreciate and understand.
As the English Legal System developed, it soon became clear that the courts of law, enforc­
ing common law, were ill-equipped at resolving disputes between holders of estates and
interests in land:
• the writ procedure followed in these courts was complicated and burdened by excessive
formality and thus delay;
• the common law failed to recognise rights of individuals in relation to land where it
would be fair and just to do so; and
• where such proprietary rights were recognised, the common law remedy of damages
often proved inadequate when such rights were infringed.
The development of the law of equity has helped, in some measure, to resolve these inadequacies.

The recognition of equitable interests in land

Whilst certain proprietary rights are recognised as existing at law, equity established the
existence of some new proprietary rights based upon a desire to do justice and act on enforc­
ing obligations of conscience.

The beneficial interest under a trust

Whilst under common law, recognition was only given to the legal title holder of a property,
equity intervened, in circumstances where this common law approach was unconscionable,
to recognise that property may be legally held for the benefit of another. This recognition
was by way of a trust. The beneficial interest under a trust is illustrated in Figure 2.1.

Figure 2.1 The beneficial interest under a trust

• Holds managerial and
Legal title administrative responsibilities
Trustee • Owes duties to beneficiaries
when exercising those
responsibilities

Equitable title

• Holds true beneficial rights to

Beneficiary the property: the right to use,
enjoy, and benefit from
the land

Chapter 2 The distinction between legal and equitable interests 17

The intervention of equity
jfe sfr ijc tjc 4.-tj: .

(The beneficial interest under a trust is discussed in more detail in chapters 9 and 10.)

Equitable right to redeem

Under common law, where the borrower (mortgagor) failed to redeem the mortgage loan
(ie repay the capital plus interest and costs) on the date specified in the contract, he lost the
property which served as security; ownership being transferred to the lender (mortgagee).
Considering this unfair and unjust, equity recognises the equitable right to redeem.
Borrowers can redeem the mortgage even after the legal date specified in the contract has
passed. (This equitable right is discussed in more detail in chapter 14.)

Restrictive covenants
Common law does not allow for the burden of a covenant to pass to a successor in title of the
land burdened by that covenant. This is because the successor is not a party to the original
contract in which the covenant was created. And this is the case even in circumstances
where the successor has knowledge of the covenant, prior to the purchase, and has conse­
quently paid a reduced price for the land.
Such inadequacy at common law has led to the intervention of equity. By recognising
restrictive covenants as creating equitable interests in land (provided certain formali­
ties are met), the burden of such covenants are potentially enforceable against succes­
sors in title to the burdened land. (These interests in land are discussed in more detail
in chapter 13.)

Estate contracts
Where a person enters into a contract to grant another an estate over a piece of land,
and that contract is breached by the grantor failing to transfer the estate in land to the
grantee as agreed, the grantee has the common law personal remedy of damages for
breach of contract.
As land is seen as unique, equity may provide an equitable remedy of specific performance.
The expectation of specific performance has meant that equity views the grantee as hav­
ing an interest in the land at the time of the contract, known as an estate contract.
You must remember, however, that such an equitable interest will only arise in circum­
stances where an order for specific performance is available. Where circumstances are
such that equity would not exercise its discretion to make such an order, no equitable
interest will arise.
This type of interest is discussed in more detail in both chapters 5 and 6.

Equitable remedies
As well as recognising new proprietary rights, equity also developed new equitable rem­
edies. This was in response to the inadequacy of the common law remedy of damages. Such
inadequacy has already been seen in relation to breaches of land contracts (see ‘Estate
contracts’).

18 Concentrate Land Law

 Identifying the status of a proprietary interest
> jfc 4; Jfc * * *

Types
There are two principal equitable remedies:

Specific performance
An order of specific performance requires someone to do something, for example to perform
a contract to transfer an estate in land.

Injunction
Whilst different types of injunctions exist, in general terms they forbid someone from doing
something, for example forbidding a person from building a fence to obstruct a right of way.

Common characteristics
• Failure to comply with an order for either remedy results in being found in contempt of
court.
• Where common law remedies are available as of right once the wrong has been proven,
equitable remedies are awarded at the discretion of the court. The intervention of eq­
uity is conscience-driven and is underlined by certain maxims, for example he who
comes to equity must come with clean hands; the person seeking the equitable remedy
must not have disqualified himself from obtaining it by acting in a grossly unconscion­
able manner: Coatsworth v Johnson (188S).

identifying the status of a proprietary

interest

Z-y>
Link to chapter 1 and ensure that you understand the difference between the two key types of
proprietary rights: estates and interests. The following considers interests in more detail. (Estates
are considered in more detail In chapters 5 and 6.)

An interest in land can have either legal or equitable status.

Legal interests
The list
To have legal capacity, the interest must be listed under s 1(2) LPA 192S.
Out of the five interests in the following list, perhaps the most important today are those
listed in paragraphs (a), (c), and (e).

Chapter 2 The distinction between legal and equitable interests 19

Identifying the status of a proprietary interest

s K2)(a) an easement, right, or privilege but only if it is equivalent in duration to one of the
two legal estates in land, ie it is to last forever (equivalent to a legal freehold), or it
has a fixed and certain duration (equivalent to a leasehold) An easement granted for
the duration of someone's life could therefore never have legal status (easements
and profits a prendre are discussed in more detail in chapter 12),

s l(2)(b) a rentcharge in possession issuing out of or charged on land being either perpetual
or for a term of years absolute (this is similar to rent paid in respect of a lease but
here it relates to a freehold estate);

s 1(2)(c) a charge by way of a legal mortgage (mortgages are discussed in more detail in
chapter 14);

s K2)(d) ... any other similar charge on land which is not created by an instrument; and

s l(2)(e) rights of entry. These are rights normally reserved by a landlord to re-enter leased
property and forfeit the lease where the tenant is in breach of covenant (discussed
in more detail in chapter 6).

Once deemed capable of being legal, by virtue of being listed under s 1(2) LPA 192S, the
interest will only become legal if certain formalities are satisfied.

The formalities
• The person granting the interest must have the capacity to grant legal interests in land.
For example, an owner of an equitable lease would not be able to grant legal easements.
You cannot grant more than you have yourself.
• The interest must, in principle, be granted by deed: s 52 LPA 1925. The requirements
for a valid deed created on/after 31 July 1990 are laid down in s 1 Law of Property
(Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989 (LP(MP)A 1989) (deeds created before this date
had to be signed, sealed, and delivered):

S 1 LP(MP)A 1989
The document must be:
• clear on its face that it is a deed;
• signed by the grantor;
• witnessed; and
• delivered.

20 Concentrate Land taw

 identifying the status of a proprietary interest
* •*. • •»»4*

• There is an additional requirement of registration in some circumstances, where the

interest is being created over registered land. Where:
- an easement equivalent in duration to a legal estate is being expressly granted/
reserved;or
- a legal charge is being granted; or
- a rentcharge or right of entry is being expressly granted/reserved,
• the disposition must be registered. The interest will not operate at law until this has
been done: s 27 Land Registration Act 2002 (see chapter 3).
Unless all the above requirements have been satisfied, the interest will not be legal. At best,
it could only be equitable but this would be dependent upon meeting the requirements in
equity (see ‘Failed attempts to grant legal interests’).

Equitable interests
These include:

Failed attempts to grant legal interests

If an interest which has legal capacity does not satisfy the legal formalities, it cannot have
legal status. Equity, however, may recognise this failed attempt to grant a legal interest as a
contract to create that interest. To do this there must be:
• a valid contract, ie one compliant with s 2 LP(MP)A 1989:

S 2 LP(MP)A 1989
The contract must be:
• in writing;
• contain all the terms; and
• be signed by both parties.
(Subject to exemptions under s 2(5), notably contracts to create short leases.)
These formalities are discussed in more detail in chapter 5.

• The contract must be one that is capable of specific performance, ie one upon which
equity would exercise its discretion to grant such an order (see earlier discussion under
■Equitable remedies’).

Chapter 2 The distinction between legal and equitable interests 21

identifying the status of a proprietary interest
********•:
• By applying the maxim that equity views as done that which ought to be done (ie that the
contract should be performed), an equitable interest arises.
Where there is no specifically enforceable valid contract, no equitable interest will arise.

Whilst the above statement is generally true, in some circumstances equity may intervene to give
a person equitable rights even where no specifically enforceable contract exists. This intervention
is based upon the finding of an estoppel. The case of Yaxley v Gotts [2000] serves to clarify and
establish the possible exceptions to the general operation of s 2 LP(MP)A 1989 and is discussed
further in chapter 5.

Agreements to grant interests in land

Rather than actually granting someone an interest in land, the grantor may agree to
do this some time in the future. Where this agreement is contained in a valid contract,
capable of specific performance, equity will recognise the grantee as having an equita­
ble interest in the land, by applying the maxim equity views as done that which ought to
be done. This can be seen, for example, in agreements to transfer a freehold estate and
agreements to grant leases, both of which are discussed in more detail in chapters 5 and
6 respectively.

Interests that can only ever be equitable

Estates or interests that are not listed in either s 1(1) or s 1(2) LPA 1925 could never have
legal status and could only ever be equitable (s 1(3) LPA 1925). These include life estates
(discussed in chapter 5), restrictive covenants (discussed in chapter 13), and beneficial inter­
ests behind a trust (discussed in chapters 9 and 10). To achieve equitable status they would
need to satisfy certain formalities, the nature of which differ depending upon the interest in
question (discussed in more detail in the relevant chapters of this book). Where the formali­
ties are not met, the right over land fails to gain proprietary status at all and remains a mere
personal right between the creating parties.

Summary
In determining whether an interest is legal or equitable, remember the questions in
Figure 2.2.

22 Concentrate Land Law

 Significance of the distinction between legal and equitable interests
;?.:$; *******

Figure 2.2 Is the interest legal or equitable?

Does the grantor have capacity ___
to grant legal interests? where there is no legal capacity, of
either the grantor or the interest (or both),
the interest could only ever be equitable.

Ip Whether it is equitable will depend upon

whether the requirements in equity have
been met. These differ depending upon
the nature of the interest in question.
Does the interest have capacity to be legal? NO

Ip If legal formalities have not been met,

an equitable interest may arise but only
where equity can view the failed attempt
to create a legal interest as a specifically
enforceable contract to create that

pl interest.

The interest is legal

Significance of the distinction between legal

and equitable interests

Link to material covered in chapters 3 and 4 on the enforcement of interests against third parties
where the status of an interest is one of the factors in determining which rules of enforcement to
apply.

Remedies
Where a legal interest is infringed, a remedy is available as of right. At common law, the
remedy is damages, although equity may provide an equitable remedy where damages are
seen as being inadequate.
Where an equitable interest has been infringed, only equitable remedies are available
and whether such remedies are awarded will depend upon the discretion of the court (see
‘Common characteristics’).

Chapter 2 The distinction between legal and equitable interests 23

Significance of the distinction between legal and equitable interests
****** 4.-

Enforcement
As discussed in chapter 1, a proprietary right may be enforceable not only against the per­
son who granted the right, but also against any other person who may come to the land over
which the right exists (the burdened land).
Whether it is binding on a third party, for example a purchaser of the burdened land, tra­
ditionally rested upon the nature of the interest:

Legal interests
These were considered binding on the whole world. Anyone coming to the burdened land
would have to respect the existence of the legal interest and allow the exercise of that right
to continue.

Equitable interests
Equitable interests would only bind a person if he was not a bona fide purchaser of a legal
estate for value without notice. To be such a purchaser, and thus take the land free from the
equitable interest, he would need to be:
1. acting bona fide, ie in good faith, honestly, and without any fraudulent intent; and
2. a purchaser, ie someone acquiring the land through the act of another rather than
automatically through an operation of law (examples of the latter include trustees in
bankruptcy (see chapter 10) and adverse possessors (see chapter 8)); and
3. a purchaser for value, ie providing some sort of consideration (money/money’s worth
or future marriage, the adequacy of which is not investigated) for the land (an example
of someone who provides no value would be someone who was gifted the land); and
4. a purchaser of a legal estate. Includes someone purchasing a legal freehold or lease­
hold estate but also a mortgage (s 87 LPA 1925); and
S. purchasing the land without notice of the interest. A purchaser will be deemed to have
notice of an interest if:
- he has actual notice, ie actual knowledge of the existence of the interest at the time
of purchase; or
- he has constructive notice, ie knowledge of all things he could have acquired actual
notice of, had he made those enquiries and inspections which he ought reasonably
to have done. What type of enquiries is a purchaser expected to make?
• Investigate the title. This will involve looking at the title deeds back to the root of
title which is set at 15 years: s 23 LPA 1969 (see chapter 4).
• Inspect the land and make suitable enquiries of any person discovered in occupa­
tion of that land: Hunt v Luck [1901], The extent of such enquiries was discussed
in Kingsnorth Trust Ltd v Tizard [1986].

24 Concentrate Land Law

 Significance of the distinction between legal and equitable interests

Kingsnorth Trust Ltd v Tizard [1986] 1 wlr 783

A mortgagee’s agent was held to have constructive notice of a wife’s equitable interest in a property
that was being mortgaged by the husband and which was in his sole name. The agent, when inspecting
the property, discovered that the husband was married but separated, despite having stated on his
mortgage application form that he was single. This should have led the agent to make further enquiries
as to the whereabouts of the wife and any interest she may have had in the property. Failure to make
such enquiries, deemed reasonable, gave the agent constructive notice of the wife’s equitable interest.

• he has imputed notice, ie knowledge of all the things about which his agents
working on the land transaction have actual or constructive notice. In Kingsnorth
Finance v Tizard [1986], the mortgagee acquired imputed notice of its agent’s
constructive notice of the wife’s equitable interest.
Only where the purchaser of the burdened land could establish all five components listed
would he take the land free from any equitable interests that might exist over it. Once this
occurred, the equitable interest lost its ability to bind any future third parties who came to
that land: Wilkes v Spooner [1911].

L-nrth^ «-xZ-ma **a.r~les7

It has been argued that if a purchaser has notice of an interest, he is not acting in good faith and
thus the requirement of good faith merely duplicates the requirement of acting without notice.
However, Lord Wilberforce in the case of Midland Bank Trust Co Ltd v Green [1981] (discussed
in chapter 4) made it clear that the two requirements are separate from one another and that one
could be satisfied whilst the other is not, although it is difficult to point to circumstances where
this may be the case.

Relevance of the distinction today

It soon became clear that the rules regarding the enforcement of interests in land against
third parties, dependent upon whether the interest was legal or equitable, were imperfect
(see ‘Enforcement’). Attempts to improve upon these rules of enforcement by introduc­
ing systems of registration are discussed in more detail in the next two chapters. That
is not to say that the system of enforcement outlined under ‘Enforcement’ has no role to
play today. It does play a small part in the system of enforcement of interests that exist
over unregistered land.

Make sure you link the previous discussion on the doctrine of notice to the role it plays in
unregistered land, discussed in chapter 4.

Chapter 2 The distinction between legal and equitable interests 25

Random documents with unrelated
content Scribd suggests to you:
Stearoptene, 33
of rose oil, 138
Stick paint, white, 340
pomade, manufacture of, 298, 299
pomader, 298-300
foundations for, 298
rouge, 339
Still, for direct steam, 43, 44
improved, 44-46
Still, ordinary, conversion of, into use with steam, 42, 43
siphon, 41, 42
Stohman's test for oil of cloves, 109
Storax, 168-172
American, 172
in grains, 171
liquid, 168-171
adulterations of, 170, 171
ordinary, 171, 172
tincture, 230
Strawberry essence, 218
ether, 216
pomade, 291
Styracin, 170
Styrax calamitus, 171, 172
vulgaris, 171, 172
Styrol, 169, 170
Sultana hair oil, 304
Sumbul root, or musk-root tincture, 231

Tannin hair dye, 321, 322

Taste and odor, testing the, of volatile oils, 66, 67
Tea hair tonic, 310, 311
Teinture Chinoise (Kohol), 319
Orientale (Karsi), 319
Templin oil, 149
Terpenes, 35, 36
adulterations of volatile oil with, 73
Terpilene, 189, 190
Testing volatile oils, 66-86
Theophrastus's work "On Perfumes," 23
Thibet or Oriental musk, 178, 179
Thymene, 147
Thyme oil, 147, 148
from the field thyme, 147, 148
Thymol, 147, 273
tooth-paste, 278
tooth-powder, 279
tooth-water, 274
Tincture, ambergris, 229
angelica-root, 231
balm-oil, 234
basil-oil, 234
benzoin, 229
bergamot-oil, 234
bitter almond-oil, 234
canango-oil, 234
cassia-oil, 235
castor, 229
cedar-oil, 235
cinnamon-oil, 235
citronella-oil, 235
civet, 228
clove-oil, 235
cumarin, 232
eucalyptus-oil, 235
geranium-oil, 235
heliotropin, 232
juniper-berry, 233
lavender-oil, 235
lemon-grass oil, 235
lemon-oil, 235
licari-oil, 235
musk, 228
root or sumbul-root, 231
seed or abelmosk, 230, 231
myrrh, 230
oil, 235
neroli-oil, 235
olibanum, 230
opopanax, 230
oil, 235
orris-root, 231
oil, 235
patchouli-oil, 235
Peru-balsam, 229
petit-grain-oil, 236
pine-leaf-oil, 236
Portugal-oil, 236
rose-oil, 236, 237
sandal-wood-oil, 236
storax, 230
tolu-balsam, 229, 230
tonka-bean, 231, 232
vanilla, 232
vanillin, 232
verbena-oil, 236
vitivert, 233
oil, 236
 wintergreen-oil, 236
ylang-ylang-oil, 236
Tinctures and extracts, 225-237
apparatus for the preparation of, 226, 227
Toilet articles, golden age for, in France, 27-29
arts of the, in ancient times, 18
introduction of the arts of the, into France, 27
vinegar, 326
Tolu balsam, 166-168
new variety of, 167, 168
Tolu balsam, tincture, 229, 230
Toluene, 166, 167
Tonka beans, 191, 192
bean tincture, 231, 232
hair oil, 304
pomade, 294, 295
Tonkin musk, 178, 179
characteristics of, 180, 181
Tooth-and mouth-waters, 274-277
paste or odontine, 277, 278
pastes and tooth-powders, 277-283
powder, Dr. Hufeland's, 280
powders and tooth-pastes, 277-283
preparation of, 279
soap, 283
Dr. Hufeland's, 282, 283
tincture, Dr. Stahl's, 276
tinctures, use of, 276, 277
Trotula, works of, 26
Turkish geranium oil, palmarosa oil, geranium oil, 112
hair dye, 316
Turpentine, oil of, 148-150
conversion of, into lemon oil, 189, 190

United States, adaptation of some districts of, for the cultivation

of plants, 33

Valerianic ether, or amyl valerate, 214-216

ethyl ether, 216
Vanilla, 195, 196
hair oil, 303
pomade, 295
tincture, 232
Vanillin, 195-198
adulteration of, 198
preparation of, 196, 197
tincture, 232
Vaseline cold cream, 331
hair oil, 303
pomade, extra fine, 298
fine (yellow), 297
(red), 297
(white), 297
pomades, 295-298
foundations for, 296
Venetian oil of turpentine, 148
Verbena oil, 150
tincture, 236
Vetiver oil, or vitivert oil, 150, 151
Victoria hair oil, 304
pomade, 294
sachet powder, 258
vaseline pomade, 297, 298
Vinaigre de Bully, 324
 de toilette, 325
de toilette à l'héliotrope, 325
de toilette à la rose, 324
de toilette à la violette, 324
de toilette orange, 325
Vinegar, aromatic, 325, 326
fumigating, 266
toilet, 326
Vinegars and essences, fumigating, 264-266
Violet-flower fumigating essence, 265
Violet fumigating pastilles, 270
powder, 267
hair oil, 304
mouth-water, 275
oil of, 150
pomade, 295
tooth-powder, 279
Virginal milk, 326
Virginia vaseline pomade, 297
Vitivert-oil tincture, 236
Vitivert, or vetiver oil, 150, 151
tincture, 233
Volatile oil, apparatus for determining the percentage of, in a
vegetable substance, 40, 41
apparatus for the distillation of, 41-46
Planchon's procedure for the recognition of a, 83-86
separation of the, and 46, 47
testing the odor of, 66
the taste of, 67
oils, 33-65
ancient method of distilling, 24
apparatus for the extraction of, 48-57
 characteristics of, 33, 34
concentrated, 35
detection of adulterations of, with an oil of lower quality,
74-83
distillation of, 39-48
division of, with reference to the guaiacum reaction, 79, 80
expression of, 36-39
extraction of, 48-58
extra strong, 35
for Cologne water, durability of, 250, 251
localities best suited for the cultivation of flowers for the
production of, 32, 33
modes of obtaining, 36-65
patented, 35
principal divisions of, 34
solubility of, 33
storage of, 65
testing of, 66-86
the, used in perfumery, 87-154
or essential oils, occurrence of, in plants, 31

Walnut hair dye, 320

pomade, 295
shells, green, for dyeing the hair, 318
Washes, 326-328
Wash for the hands, 334
Water, fumigating, 266
separation of the, and oil, 46, 47
Wax pomade, cheap, 300
pomades, 298
White lead, 336
liquid paint, 341
paint, 337
rose solid perfume, 259
 smelling salts, 260, 261
stick paint, 340
thyme oil, 147
tooth-powder, 280
Williams, F. R., utilization of Maumené's test by, 82, 83
Wintergreen oil, 151-153
adulteration of, 153
tincture, 236

Ylang-ylang hair oil, 303

oil, 153, 154
tincture, 236
sachet powder, 257
Yunnan musk, 178, 179

Zibethum, 184, 185

Zinc white, 336
 FOOTNOTES:
[1] Paschkis, Kosmetik für Aerzte. Wien, 1890.
[2] Gli ornamenti delle donne, tratti dalle seriture d'una Reina
greca, par M. Giovanni Marinello in Venetia.
[3] Hager, Chemische Reactionen zur Nachweise des
Terpentinoels in den aetherischen Oelen, etc. Berlin, 1885.
[4] Pharm. Centralh. 1888, S. 482 u. 555; 1889, S. 133.
[5] Compare Kremel's observations, p. 91.
[6] The manner of expelling the ether is of great influence upon
the accuracy of the result. Though the non-aldehydes volatilize
with difficulty, they are volatile, and hence the ether must be
quickly expelled, and the beaker not allowed to stand longer upon
the water-bath than necessary for the evaporation of the ether.
[7] See later on under "Balsams and Resins."
[8] This, however, applies only to Bulgarian oil; French and Saxon
rose oils have a greenish color.
[9] Dingler's Polyt. Journ., 184, 367.
[10] Dingler's Polyt. Journ., 180, 77.
[11] The figures for free acids refer to cubic centimeters of cold,
saturated, alcoholic solutions.
[14] By "best alcohol" is understood rectified alcohol of 95 to 97
per cent.
[15] Compare patchouli oil, p. 130.
[16] For all the tinctures, 95 to 97 per cent. alcohol of the best
quality is to be used.
[17] By pine-leaf oil is understood pine oil or dwarf-pine oil. See
p. 149.
[18] The better quality of oil from the East Indian wood is to be
used.
[19] Bulgarian rose oil is generally designated "Turkish rose oil."
 [20] This spinach extract unfortunately bleaches very rapidly
when exposed to light, and the extraits colored with it acquire a
dirty-brown color. Hence it is recommended to use the "green
tincture," which can be purchased from the larger manufactories
of volatile oils.
[21] The so-called liquid orris-root oil is not pure orris-root oil, but
generally a distillate of orris-root with bergamot oil; there are,
however, also products in which the orris root is distilled with
copaiba balsam oil and cedar oil.
[22] Genuine horse fat is obtained from the upper portion of the
neck of the horse.
[23] A pomade containing musk cannot be used by everyone,
since in nervous persons it may readily cause headache.
[24] See foot-note, p. 257.
[25] For fine preparations, rose water is used; for ordinary,
distilled water.

Transcriber's Notes

Obvious typographical errors have been silently corrected.

Variable use of accents and ligatures has been standardised to ensure compatibility
between text and index.
The reference in the index to oleum uonæ has been corrected to oleum unonæ.
The index lists Pomade - cheap - wax at page 390, which does not exist. This has been
changed to 290.

Footnotes 12 and 13, merely repeat footnote 11, so have been removed and all
references changed to footnote 11.
*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK A PRACTICAL
TREATISE ON THE MANUFACTURE OF PERFUMERY ***

Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions

will be renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S.

copyright law means that no one owns a United States
copyright in these works, so the Foundation (and you!) can copy
and distribute it in the United States without permission and
without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth in the
General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to copying and
distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the
PROJECT GUTENBERG™ concept and trademark. Project
Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if
you charge for an eBook, except by following the terms of the
trademark license, including paying royalties for use of the
Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for
copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is
very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such
as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
research. Project Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and
printed and given away—you may do practically ANYTHING in
the United States with eBooks not protected by U.S. copyright
law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark license, especially
commercial redistribution.

START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
 PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the

free distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this
work (or any other work associated in any way with the phrase
“Project Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of
the Full Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or
online at [Link]/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and

Redistributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works
1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand,
agree to and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual
property (trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree
to abide by all the terms of this agreement, you must cease
using and return or destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works in your possession. If you paid a fee for
obtaining a copy of or access to a Project Gutenberg™
electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the terms
of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only

be used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by
people who agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement.
There are a few things that you can do with most Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works even without complying with the
full terms of this agreement. See paragraph 1.C below. There
are a lot of things you can do with Project Gutenberg™
electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement and
help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg™
electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the
Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the
collection of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the
individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the
United States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright
law in the United States and you are located in the United
States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from copying,
distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative works
based on the work as long as all references to Project
Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope that you will
support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting free
access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg™
works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for
keeping the Project Gutenberg™ name associated with the
work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement
by keeping this work in the same format with its attached full
Project Gutenberg™ License when you share it without charge
with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also
govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most
countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside
the United States, check the laws of your country in addition to
the terms of this agreement before downloading, copying,
displaying, performing, distributing or creating derivative works
based on this work or any other Project Gutenberg™ work. The
Foundation makes no representations concerning the copyright
status of any work in any country other than the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project

Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other

immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must
appear prominently whenever any copy of a Project
Gutenberg™ work (any work on which the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” appears, or with which the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed,
viewed, copied or distributed:

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United

States and most other parts of the world at no cost and
with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it,
give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project
Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at
[Link]. If you are not located in the United
States, you will have to check the laws of the country
where you are located before using this eBook.

1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is

derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not
contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of
the copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to
anyone in the United States without paying any fees or charges.
If you are redistributing or providing access to a work with the
phrase “Project Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the
work, you must comply either with the requirements of
paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use
of the work and the Project Gutenberg™ trademark as set forth
in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is

posted with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and
distribution must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through
1.E.7 and any additional terms imposed by the copyright holder.
Additional terms will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™
License for all works posted with the permission of the copyright
holder found at the beginning of this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project

Gutenberg™ License terms from this work, or any files
 containing a part of this work or any other work associated with
Project Gutenberg™.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute

this electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1
with active links or immediate access to the full terms of the
Project Gutenberg™ License.

1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form,
including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if
you provide access to or distribute copies of a Project
Gutenberg™ work in a format other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or
other format used in the official version posted on the official
Project Gutenberg™ website ([Link]), you must,
at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a copy,
a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy
upon request, of the work in its original “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or
other form. Any alternate format must include the full Project
Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,

performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™
works unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or

providing access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works provided that:

• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive
from the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the
method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The
fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark,
but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty
 payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on
which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your
periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked
as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information
about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation.”

• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who

notifies you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt
that s/he does not agree to the terms of the full Project
Gutenberg™ License. You must require such a user to return or
destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of
Project Gutenberg™ works.

• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of

any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in
the electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90
days of receipt of the work.

• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project

Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different
terms than are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain
permission in writing from the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, the manager of the Project Gutenberg™
trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3
below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend

considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on,
transcribe and proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright
law in creating the Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these
efforts, Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the medium
on which they may be stored, may contain “Defects,” such as,
but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data,
transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual property
infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a
computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be
read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except

for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in
paragraph 1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation, the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark,
and any other party distributing a Project Gutenberg™ electronic
work under this agreement, disclaim all liability to you for
damages, costs and expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE
THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT
EXCEPT THOSE PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE
THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY
DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE
TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL,
PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE
NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you

discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of
receiving it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you
paid for it by sending a written explanation to the person you
received the work from. If you received the work on a physical
medium, you must return the medium with your written
explanation. The person or entity that provided you with the
defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu
of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person
or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second
opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund.
If the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund
in writing without further opportunities to fix the problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set

forth in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’,
WITH NO OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR
IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied

warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of
damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this
agreement violates the law of the state applicable to this
agreement, the agreement shall be interpreted to make the
maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by the applicable
state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision of
this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.

1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the

Foundation, the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the
Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any
volunteers associated with the production, promotion and
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless
from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, that
arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you
do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project
Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or
deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any Defect
you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission

of Project Gutenberg™
Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new
computers. It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of
volunteers and donations from people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the

assistance they need are critical to reaching Project
Gutenberg™’s goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™
collection will remain freely available for generations to come. In
2001, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was
created to provide a secure and permanent future for Project
Gutenberg™ and future generations. To learn more about the
Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and how your
efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and the
Foundation information page at [Link].

Section 3. Information about the Project

Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-
profit 501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the
laws of the state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status
by the Internal Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or
federal tax identification number is 64-6221541. Contributions
to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation are tax
deductible to the full extent permitted by U.S. federal laws and
your state’s laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500

West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact
links and up to date contact information can be found at the
Foundation’s website and official page at
[Link]/contact
 Section 4. Information about Donations to
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation
Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without
widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission
of increasing the number of public domain and licensed works
that can be freely distributed in machine-readable form
accessible by the widest array of equipment including outdated
equipment. Many small donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly
important to maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws

regulating charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of
the United States. Compliance requirements are not uniform
and it takes a considerable effort, much paperwork and many
fees to meet and keep up with these requirements. We do not
solicit donations in locations where we have not received written
confirmation of compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or determine
the status of compliance for any particular state visit
[Link]/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states

where we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know
of no prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from
donors in such states who approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot

make any statements concerning tax treatment of donations
received from outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp
our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current

donation methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a
number of other ways including checks, online payments and
credit card donations. To donate, please visit:
[Link]/donate.

Section 5. General Information About

Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could
be freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose
network of volunteer support.

Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several

printed editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by
copyright in the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus,
we do not necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any
particular paper edition.

Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
facility: [Link].

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™,

including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new
eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email newsletter to hear
about new eBooks.
Welcome to our website – the ideal destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. With a mission to inspire endlessly, we offer a
vast collection of books, ranging from classic literary works to
specialized publications, self-development books, and children's
literature. Each book is a new journey of discovery, expanding
knowledge and enriching the soul of the reade

Our website is not just a platform for buying books, but a bridge
connecting readers to the timeless values of culture and wisdom. With
an elegant, user-friendly interface and an intelligent search system,
we are committed to providing a quick and convenient shopping
experience. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery
services ensure that you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and

personal growth!

[Link]