Land law

ANSWER ANY THREE QUESTIONS OUT OF THE SIX AVAILABLE Question 1 Three months ago, Rita and Pedro bought a large detached Victorian property called Grandiose House with a view to it being their future family home. The seller was Sara, who was recorded at the Land Registry as the sole registered proprietor of the property. Rita, a successful fashion model, contributed half the purchase price, thinking that Pedro would be contributing the other half from his own resources. Due to pressure of work, Rita left legal matters to Pedro. She did agree that the legal title to the property should be in the sole name of Pedro, as Rita was involved in divorce proceedings and did not want it known that she was buying a house with Pedro. Rita borrowed a key from Sally and the removal-firm moved her belongings into the property the day before legal completion of the purchase. The property was subsequently registered in the name of Pedro at the Land Registry. Pedro has now revealed to her that he funded his half of the purchase price with a loan from Cribby Building Society to which he granted a legal mortgage on the property at the time of the purchase. Pedro has also admitted that last month, because he needed funds for his legal business, he granted a further mortgage on the property to secure a loan from Platinum Bank, while Rita was away in New York at a fashion event. Rita is now concerned what her position will be if Pedro is unable to meet the mortgage loan payments to the Building Society and the Bank. Rita wishes to know whether she has an interest in the property and, if so, whether it is binding on the mortgagees. Rita has now consulted you for legal advice. * Critically analyse if Rita has an interest in Grandiose House and advise what steps Rita may have taken to protect this potential interest (15 marks) From the point of law in the UK Rita',s claim is based on resulting and constructive trusts, and she seems to depend on her interest in Grandiose House. Firstly, Rita might have created an incidental trust by paying half the purchase price. This situation usually happens, for example, when money is given for a purchase and another person’s name is registered on the property without any indication or the intention that the gift is given. The case with Rita shows that undisturbed ownership of one-half over the property does not imply that Pedro had a recognized gift, which she wrote into, meaning that she retains ownership proportion to her financial input.[Chambers, R., 1997. Resulting trusts. Oxford University Press.] There could be a beneficial ownership trust situation akin to this if Rita's situation were to give rise to one. It can give a departure point between the conduct and statements of the parties available to the outside world, which recalls the collective behaviour and character. Indeed, doubt Rita had been a factor in helping Grandpa conclude that all family members would consider the ranch as the place of their dwelling; it is more likely that Grandpa wanted to have Rita's opinion about the ranch. Constructive trusts are an indispensable mechanism implemented in domestic settings, with financial arrangements being informal, but the intentions of forming the trust are firmly specified.[Gabriel, S. and Gardner, W.L., 1999. Are there" his" and" hers" types of interdependence? The implications of gender differences in collective versus relational interdependence for affect, behavior, and cognition. Journal of personality and social psychology, 77(3), p.642.] For Rita's Security, there are possibilities of many different steps she could take to protect herself. A trust at the time of purchasing could have carried this information, as her interest in the lives of Eliza and Fanny was just close. Therefore, it could serve as a definitive fact of her entitlement. Furthermore, it would be wise to register a restriction at the Land Registry; It can be used to prevent Pedro from making the land a commodity- either by sale or further mortgaging- without considering Rita's beneficial interest or seeking her approval. Given Pedro's knowledge of Rita, which is related to her divorce proceedings, a formal agreement with the ex that reflects Rita's contributions and his recognition of her interests could also be beneficial. The ultimate concern through this course of events is consulting a lawyer all along the way, which would have indicated that her financial contributions are serially protected, with an attorney in property law leading her through the required legal formalities to ensure protection for her interests.[Dixon, M., 2021. Modern land law. Routledge.] * Critically analyse if Rita’s potential interest in Grandiose House is binding on Cribby Building Society (40 marks) To clarify the area of law which has preponderance over binding on Cribby Banking Group in the case of Rita's potential interest in Grandiose House, we need to look into the peculiarity of UK's property law, especially the provisions of trusts and land registration. The pivotal Act remains the Land Registration Act 2002, which mandates that unregistered rights, like Rita's, do not bind common interests unless the unregistered interest has priority over the third party who purchases the land by value, such as the mortgagees, without any notice of the unregistered rights. The primary aspect of this matter that needs to be observed is that Rita's interest resulted from trust or constructive trust because of her financial funding in the property's purchase. The other outstanding factor is that the interest she had needed to be approved by the land registry. It puts her in the category of owner or landlord. It can be susceptible to bias, even if Pedro remains the only registered owner who deals solely with the property in private. Over-enlarging, as defined in Section 2 of the Law of Property Act 1925, affects the transferral of the equitable title into the cash payments or amount of the mortgage upon fulfilment of the sale or mortgage agreement terms accordingly. Besides being just one priest, Pedro, to wit, the separation of sale proceeds among beneficiaries, Ana, the sole Stakeholder, can easily stretch the protective measures in a manner unanswerable because he is the only person disposed to do so.[Cooke, E., 2020. Land Law, 3e. Oxford University Press, USA.] On the contrary, to constitute outright indemnity for Rita, the mortgagee should be notified that she had a pending case. However, this could also be either actual knowledge (precisely the circumstances) or constructive knowledge (more circumstances, which could suggest to the mortgagee the need to conduct further inquiries into any other interests regarding the property). Neither of the situations described (in the source) is accurate. Eventually, Rita may enter a full-blow struggle for the ownership of the property and feel frustrated as her interest remains undefined or is not recognized by the third party. It shows an extreme weakness when aid is given when money transfers are not documented in the donor country and are not legally considered at the time of property registration. The situation could have been rectified with declarations of trust or registration of limitations at the Land Registry, which would have secured Rita's position against any 3rd parties such as Cribby. * Critically analyse if Rita’s potential interest in Grandiose House is binding on Platinum Bank (45 marks) The primary issue to be addressed is whether Rita's beneficial interest, which originated after her financial participation in the acquisition of Grandiose House, was protected by a third party, such as Platinum Bank. To give Pedro and Rita an anomalous situation, neither the Land Registry nor the terms of joint property they have between them formally protect her claim from equitable interest only. Impact of Overreaching Platinum Bank enjoys that position due to the strengthening of overreaching and the case with the Cribby Building Society debate. Exceeding the amount of reference here implies that the enforcement of the mortgage (Pedro, the only legal owner, granted a mortgage to Platinum Bank) may lead to the transfer of equitable interests (with Rita as an example) away from the property itself to the sale proceeds in the event of enforcement actions, such as repossession and disposal. Since there is only one trustee (Pedro), and the vote was taken unilaterally, the legal measures to secure Rita's share are absent, and she runs the risk of being overreached.[Weinberg, T., 2023. Property of the People? Black Land Buyers' Imaginings of Property Ownership, 1900-1994 (Doctoral dissertation).] Notice to the Mortgagee For Platinum Bank to recognize Rita's interest caused by implied or unintentional knowledge of such, the bank will have to be aware or well informed. Most certainly, a mere constructive notice is improbable under this scenario unless she had notified the bank in a specific language or sent a letter that could be considered part of the legal documentation involved in the loan application process. The requirements would be interpreted in such a way that the banks should be suspicious about the actual owner of the property and also contributions by seeing the circumstances surrounding the property's ownership...