Chapter 4 Self-test Questions

. Mylo owned the fee simple in River Lodge, unregistered title. Twelve months ago he granted Oriana a five year legal lease of River Lodge. Oriana has not yet moved in. Mylo has just sold River Lodge to Felix, who knew nothing about Oriana's lease. Is Felix bound by the lease?

No, because he is a bona fide purchaser for value of a legal estate without notice of the lease.

A legal lease, like all legal property rights, is good against the whole world.

No, because legal lease are not property rights.

A legal right loses its validity if it is not exercised for six months.

. What do we mean by 'equity's darling'?

A bona fide purchaser for value of a legal estate without notice of the (claimed) equitable interest.

The owner of an equitable interest which is binding on the purchaser of a legal estate because the purchaser has notice.

The owner of an equitable interest who has priority under the 'First in time, first in right' rule.

Lord Eldon's mistress.

. Penny Purchaser 'does her own conveyancing' when she buys 3 Evington Gardens. The seller hands to her a deed dated 1965; it is the conveyance under which the seller acquired the land. This conveyance 'recited' a restrictive covenant entered into in 1900, which prevents use of 3 Evington Gardens for business purposes.
Is Penny bound by the restrictive covenant? She says that she did not understand the meaning of the recitals clause.

Yes, Penny as a reasonable purchaser must make all the necessary enquiries to ensure that she is without notice of equitable rights.

No, as the 1900 document was behind the root of title.

No, as modern law encourages 'do-it-yourself' conveyancers.

Yes, as all pre-1926 restrictive covenants automatically bind purchasers.

. When we use the phrase 'purchaser for value', what is meant by 'value'?

A fair price.

Anything which is 'consideration' for the purposes of the Law of Contract, including the actual entering into a marriage.

Anything which is 'consideration' for the purposes of the Law of Contract, but excluding the actual entering into a marriage.

Anything which is 'consideration' for the purposes of the Law of Contract, but excluding nominal consideration.

. Harold has owned 'Chenu' since 1998. In 2000, Emily acquired a constructive trust interest in Chenu by paying for extensive renovations. Last week, Harold and Gordon agreed to an equitable lease over Chenu; Gordon is to be tenant for five years. Yesterday Emily assigned her constructive trust interest to Thomas. Is Gordon's equitable lease subject to Thomas's rights?

No. Gordon acquired his rights before Thomas acquired his. So, applying 'first in time, first in right', Gordon is not subject to Gordon's rights.

Yes. Thomas's rights were created first.

No, provided Gordon had no notice of the constructive trust interest.

Yes, if Gordon did have notice of Thomas's rights.

. In 1915, Alfred, the then owner of Flores House, entered into a restrictive covenant with his neighbour Poppy, the then owner of Willow House. Under the covenant, Alfred promised not to build in the garden of Flores House.
In 1930, Alfred sold Flores House to Bill. The conveyance 'recited' the restrictive covenant.
In 1965, Bill sold to Carl. The conveyance did not 'recite' the restrictive covenant.
Dexter has now purchased Flores House from Carl. Is Dexter bound by the 1915 covenant?

Yes, as a restrictive covenant is a legal property right good against the whole world.

Yes, as Dexter should have inspected the 1930 conveyance.

Yes, but only if Dexter or his agent actually know of the restrictive covenant because they looked at the 1930 conveyance.

No.

. In Kingsnorth Finance v Tizard, what is the additional inquiry which Marshall, the mortgagee's agent, should have made?

He should have opened up wardrobes to look for women's clothing.

He should have looked under the floorboards.

He should have called round unannounced.

He should have called, by appointment, on a weekday.

. Kingsnorth v Tizard was (in effect) a case of 'imputed constructive notice'. By this phrase we mean a situation where:

The purchaser's agent actually knew of the equitable interest, but did not tell the purchaser.

The purchaser's agent ought to have made inquiries which might have revealed the equitable interest.

The purchaser's agent ought have to made an inquiry which would definitely have revealed the equitable interest.

The purchaser's agent actually knew of the equitable interest, he told the purchaser, but the purchaser chose to ignore the information.

. You have a constructive trust interest in number 2 Queens Street, the legal fee simple to which belongs to your partner. 2 Queens Street is unregistered title.
To ensure that your equitable interest is binding on purchasers, what would you do?

Hide all your belongings, and refuse to answer any questions put to you.

Keep your belongings in view, refuse to answer any questions.

Hide all your belongings, but do answer any questions by saying 'I claim a constructive trust interest in this property'.

Keep your belongings in view, and answer any questions by saying 'I claim a constructive trust interest in the property'.

. In 1930, Granary Meadow was conveyed from Ewan to Finn. This conveyance recited a restrictive covenant, entered into in 1920, limiting Granary Meadow to agricultural purposes only.
In 1940, Granary Meadow was conveyed from Finn to Lorenzo; this conveyance did not recite the 1920 covenant.
In 1980, Granary Meadow was conveyed from Lorenzo to Jamal. Jamal's solicitor looked only at the 1940 conveyance. He did not discover the 1920 covenant.
Tracey has now brought Granary Meadow. Tracey's solicitor did, out of extreme caution, look at the 1930, 1940 and 1980 conveyances, but did not tell Tracey about the covenant recited in the 1930 conveyance. Is Tracey bound by the covenant?

Yes, because Tracey has actual notice.

Yes, because Tracey has imputed notice.

Yes, because Tracey has constructive notice.

No.

. If the right is registrable as a land charge, but has not been registered on the Land Charges Register, what is the outcome?

The right is completely void - not enforceable against anybody, not even the original grantor.

The right is void against the purchaser, but valid against donees and people who inherit the land.

The right is void against a purchaser, unless the purchaser has notice of the rights from some other source.

The right is valid against the grantor, but void against the grantor's successors in title.

. In 2007, Iggy and Keon entered into a Civil Partnership. They live in Iggy's house (unregistered title). Keon now wishes to register his 'Class F Home Rights'. Unfortunately, Iggy uses a wide variety of 'aliases', and Keon does not have access to the title deeds. What should Keon do?

Register only against the name shown in the Civil Partnership Certificate.

Register against every name he can ever remember Iggy using.

Register only against the name Iggy is currently using for his business dealings.

Register only against the name shown on the electoral register.

. In 1980, 'Fox Hollow' was conveyed into the name of DAVID FRANK SMYTHE. In 2011, David's wife Janis registered her 'Class F Home Rights' against the name of DAVID FRANK SMITHE.
David has now sold 'Fox Hollow' to Keanu. In what circumstances will the Home Rights be void against Keanu?

If he did not bother to search at all.

If he searched against DAVID FRANK SMYTHE and the search certificate says there are no entries.

If he searched against DAVID FRANK SMITH, and the search certificate does not reveal the rights.

If he searched against D F SMYTHE, and the search certificate does not reveal the rights.

. Which of the following equitable interests is registrable as a Land Charge?

A restrictive covenant contained in a 999 year lease entered into in 1930.

An option to purchase entered into in 2005.

An equitable mortgage where the mortgagee does take possession of the title deeds.

An equitable profit created in 1922.

. Which of the following equitable interests is not registrable as a Land Charge?

An equitable mortgage where the mortgagee has not taken the title deeds.

A restrictive covenant on freehold land entered into in 1920.

An equitable easement created in 1927.

An equitable lease to last for fifteen years entered into in 2010.

. Which of the following legal property rights is registrable as a land charge?

A legal mortgage where the mortgagee does not take the title deeds.

A legal lease for three years.

A legal rentcharge due to expire in 2037.

A legal mortgage where the mortgagee does take the title deeds.

. Francesco owned High Trees Farm. Six weeks ago, he contracted to sell High Trees Farm to Greg. However yesterday, he conveyed the legal ownership in the farm to Harvinder in return for a sack of potatoes. Harvinder knew that Greg had agreed to buy the farm. Greg had not registered an estate contract. Does Greg's right bind Harvinder?

No, as Greg has given 'money's worth'.

Yes, because a sack of potatoes is not money's worth.

Yes, because Harvinder clearly had notice of the unregistered estate contract.

Yes, because a sack of potatoes is not 'consideration'.

. Which of the following types of right are not capable of being overreached?

Rights of beneficiaries under an express trust of land.

Rights of beneficiaries under an express trust for sale of land.

Rights of an equitable lessee.

Rights of beneficiaries under an old-fashioned strict settlement.

. Which of the following equitable interests is still (in relation to unregistered land) subject to the doctrine of notice?

An equitable interest under an expressly created trust.

A proprietary estoppel interest.

A restrictive covenant burdening freehold land entered into in 1927.

An equitable mortgage where the mortgagee has not taken the deeds.

Quiz Content