Summary

Fraudsters had incorporated a new company with the same name as the registered owner and then “sold” the land to a registered purchaser. It was held that the registered purchaser took subject to the “true owner’s” rights both generally and as such were, on the facts, overriding interests. The registered purchaser was held to be liable in trespass for its conduct on the land. The decision is of importance with regards to overriding interests and the general question of whether an apparently good registered title is open to challenge from a true owner, and so as to give rise to liabilities in trespass. It is presently subject to an appeal to the House of Lords.

Facts

Held

(A) by CA (1) actual occupation of derelict land on facts (2) registered transfer executed by fraudster ineffective to transfer beneficial interest (3) rectification perhaps not retrospective (4) registered purchaser liable in trespass (B) by High Court in addition (1) new registration did not change identity of registered proprietor (2) unjust not to rectify register.