header-logo header-logo

24 May 2012
Issue: 7515 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Equity

Hughmans Solicitors v Central Stream Services Ltd (in Liquidation) and another [2012] EWHC 1222 (Ch), [2012] All ER (D) 102 (May)

The basic rule as to priority between competing equitable interests in relation to registered land was laid down in unambiguous terms by s 28 of the Land Registration Act 2002 (LRA 2002). Priority was determined by the order in which those equitable interests were created. Priority for a later interest over an earlier interest was conferred by registration if, but only if, the later interest was a disposition made for valuable consideration. If it was, then the earlier interest lost its priority if not protected on the register. If it was not, then the priority of the two competing equitable interests continued to be governed by the order of their creation.

It would be wrong to read s 3(4) of the Charging Orders Act 1979 (COA 1979) as containing within it an unspoken presumption or deeming provision to the effect that a charge imposed by a charging order should, for the purposes of the LRA 2002 or

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll