Case Study-Disaster communications
1. Distinguish between real and personal property and demonstrate knowledge of legal and equitable interests in property
2. Identify the methods of creating interests in land and the way those interests may be protected on both registered and unregistered land
3. Analyse the principles of trust and co-ownership and understand how land can be held by more than one person
4. Understand the nature of easements and profits and critically evaluate the principles that govern them
5. Identify and evaluate the rules and principles that govern the transfer of ownership and covenants that can be imposed
QUESTION 1:
Joseph and Mary were the freehold proprietors of adjoining houses at numbers 27 and 29 Acacia Avenue respectively. The two neighbours always got on well and lived in their respective houses for over 25 years. Many years ago, Joseph executed a deed which granted a ‘right of way on foot only’ to Mary along a two metre wide strip of the end of Joseph’s garden to enable Mary to gain access to her allotment which is at the other side of and behind Joseph’s land. Joseph has always parked his car beside the gable end of Mary’s house on a piece of open land which falls within Mary’s ownership. There has never been any formal arrangement about car parking, but this is something that Joseph has always done and Mary has never raised any objection. Mary recently sold her property to Les and Janice. There was no mention in the conveyancing documents about either the right of way over Joseph’s land or the parking of vehicles at the side of Mary’s property.
Advise Joseph of the legal position in the following circumstances:
(a) Les objects to Joseph parking his car at the side of what is now Les and Janice’s property. Les has threatened to either clamp Joseph’s car or have it towed away if he parks it there again.
(b) Les and Janice own a car each and Les has started to park his car on the two metre wide strip across the end of Joseph’s garden.
(c) Les and Janice have built a high wooden fence between numbers 27 and 29, on Les and Janice’s side of the boundary, which is blocking the light to Joseph’s kitchen
QUESTION 2:
Duncan and Ruth are the freehold proprietors of ‘Ivy Cottage’. Many years ago, the then owner of ‘Ivy Cottage’ sold the adjacent piece of land to enable the purchaser to build a new property on that land. The title deeds to both properties reflected that there was an agreement between the adjoining property owners that, amongst other things, the new property:
a) Would ‘at all times, now and in the future, be maintained in a good condition and in a style and appearance in keeping with the neighbouring properties built and to be built’; and
b) Would not ‘be used for the purpose of operating a business of any kind whatsoever’.
The new property became known as ‘Daisy Cottage’ and is now owned by Anthony and Cleo. Duncan and Ruth are unhappy that Anthony and Cleo have recently ‘pebble-dashed’ the front of Daisy Cottage, which makes it stand out from the rest of the houses in the neighbourhood which all still have their original stone frontages. Duncan and Ruth have also discovered that Anthony is making ‘home-brewed’ beer and selling it to his friends and neighbours.
Advise Duncan and Ruth on their legal position in these circumstances.
QUESTION 3:
In June 2010, Tristan Sethberg purchased Hallowed Hall, a large house set in its own grounds. The purchase was financed by a loan from Findlater Bank plc which was secured by a legal charge in the Bank’s favour and registered in accordance with the provisions of the Land Registration Act 2002.
In January 2011 Tristan married Wendy and she moved into occupation of Hallowed Hall, but the property remained in Tristan’s sole name. In September2011, Tristan was experiencing financial difficulties and he borrowed £50,000 from Shoddy Bank plc to finance repairs to Hallowed Hall and to pay off some of his business creditors. The loan was secured by a duly registered second charge over the property.
Tristan’s financial circumstances have now deteriorated further and he has left the country to avoid his creditors, leaving Wendy in occupation of the premises. The mortgage repayments are not being met
Advise Wendy on her position in relation to the following points:
(a) Whether she can resist a claim by either Findlater Bank or Shoddy Bank for orders for possession and/or sale, and, if so, on what grounds.
(b) If she is unable to oppose an order for possession and/or sale, what is the position if Shoddy Bank obtain possession and/or sell the property.
(c) If she is unable to oppose an order for possession and/or sale, what is the position if Findlater Bank obtain possession and/or sell the property.