Law assignment.

Law assignment 1
Law assignment
Student name
Institute of afflation

Law assignment 2
Table of Contents
Introduction...........................................................................................................................................3
Case background...................................................................................................................................3
Principles of land law............................................................................................................................4
Literature review...................................................................................................................................4
Application and reform recommendations.............................................................................................6
Conclusion...........................................................................................................................................10
Reference.............................................................................................................................................10

Law assignment 3
Introduction
This case uses the principals of English Land Law that focuses on the property
situated at England and Wales. This law is based on the principals of the law of Property Act
1925, and the Settled Land Act 1925. Other aspects considered in this model include the
Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 and the 2002 Land Registration Act
2002.Through the land law, this paper addresses issues about the ownership of land, equitable
and legal ownership, tangible andintangible hereditaments of the land, and the concept of
enforceability of covenant.
As in the present case, the focus of the research will be to decipher the third parties’
rights in land and whether the covenants or easement imposed during original ownership are
impacted by the third-party rights. In this sense, the focus of the land law is to ensure that the
transfer of land is completed safely, and through, thus protecting the rights of the buyer and
the purchaser. The focus of the paper is to scrutinize the case scenario and then identify the
issues faced by varied third-party stakeholders1. The paper will assess the enforceability of
previous covenants made by the previous owner, and assess their implications on the present
purchasers. The case, will review thecurrent law and propose the needs of reform for the
Land law. The paper will further deduce the importance of formality requirements and
distinguish between legal and equitable interests in terms of the case scenario to provide
recommendations to the plaintiff.
Case background
A freehold property owned by Camilla with a large manor house was partitioned by
her into four plots (North Side, South Side, East Side and West Side). While Camelia lived in
the South Side; the North Side was sold to Stacey; the East Side to Kamran and the West Side
to Zaim. As all four houses were sold, Xenia purchased the North Side; Maria purchased the
East Side, Zoe purchased the West Side and Sonia purchased the South Side of the plot and
house2.
Earlier the covenant between Camelia and Stacey entailed that there will be a picket
fence to be erected and maintained by Stacey between her garden and Camelia'. However,
1Joseph Warren, 'The Law Of Property Act, 1922' (1923) 21 Michigan Law Review.
2I. L. L., 'Real Property—Vendor And Purchaser—Implied Right Of Way—Rectification Of Conveyance
—Law Of Property Act, 1925, S. 62' (1930) 4 The Cambridge Law Journal.

Law assignment 4
the fence separating the gardens have fallen at present. The earlier covenants between
Camelia and Kamran was that the property would be used as a single dwelling facility.
However, an acupuncture practice has been set up by Maria here. The last side (west side) of
the property was managed by Zaim, who was supposed to manage the repairs of the house.
However, here as well the house gutter has been blocked with dirt and moss3. This has further
resulted in damage to the west side of the wall. In this sense, it is construed that all four
covenants proposed by thy original stakeholders are not adopted at present, which is the
reason for Sonia to seek a professional opinion.
Principles of land law
In this context the first aspect to be studied includes application of the Law of
Property Act 1925, section 205(1) (ix) as per which land includes physical things such as
fence, buildings, fixtures, and heridaments; and also “intangible rights” such as an easement
as was evident in the context of the Newlon Housing Trust v Alsulaimen [1999] AC
313.Typically, acquisition of land can be through either gift, trust, succession or by selling
contracts. In the present case, the selling of the property is evident by the contract, hence the
application of the Law of Property Act 1925 is applicable. The act transfers the freehold by
lease to the new owners.While ideally, the covenants acts as a binding and intangible
resources in the present case, it is also noted that this case is limited by the Land Registration
Act 2002section 27(2), as per which, :“ it is mandated for a registered estate, to complete
details of registration regarding transfer, and grant of term of years”. If the date of the grant
of the year is shared, than the right to possession can be discontinued once that period
reaches4. Popular opinion reflects that the registration law of the country needs to be
reviewed, as the impact on the public interest often remains the focus, and meanwhile, the
individual impact can be dire.
Literature review
Land law and formality of requirement
Here in the case it is noted that the details of the grant are not shared, and further for
absolute ownership of the land, the new owners are expected to make registration compulsory
for all transfers of land, and in the meanwhile, they are supposed to be responsible for the
3Simon Gardner, 'The Land Registration Act 2002 - The Show On The Road' (2014) 77 The Modern
Law Review.
4Emma Lees, 'INDEMNITY AND THE LAND REGISTRATION ACT 2002' (2014) 73 The Cambridge
Law Journal.

Law assignment 5
management of the conditions. Since, the land ownership in a true sense is not extended,
unless for a land where the seven years of ownership or co-ownership is provided.
Technically, the inclusion of a formality of requirements in the contract, which is defined as
the formality introduced in writing in the consent forms such that the people have a clear
comprehension of the expectations of the law in the context of the property owner and
responsibilities is deemed important as well. However, it is also important to note that often
the formality of requirement is not important in the property transfer, and only verbal
interaction can be considered contractual as well5.
In the present case an important consideration includes that while the ownership of
the land was transferred to the new owners by all the four owners, the new occupants are new
owners in a free lease property for only one year6. This entails that the norms of the land law
will not apply to them comprehensively, and the intangible aspects of the land such as
easement and covenant might not be applicable for them. Here the evidence of poor construct
of personal consideration in the land law is evident again.
Covenant
This is an analogous agreement in the context of the English land law, where an
agreement (affirmative or negative) is made between the covenantor and covenantee
regarding some action associated with the use of land. Often these covenants run with the
land (covenant appurtenant) thus abiding the new owners to adapt to a term defined by the
earlier owners with the transfer of land. However, if such types of covenants are applicable
than they are presented in the deed. In the common law, the restrictive covenant should be
applied if,
 The covenant is focused on benefiting the land rather than an individual
 The covenant has an impact on the land value
 The benefited land from the covenant must be identifiable by the stakeholders
The focus of the covenant is that the burden or the responsibility should be beared by
the stakeholder with the higher degree of return from the initiative7. The burden meanwhile is
enforceable by the lawif the convenator or their successor have legal rights to access the
5Kenneth Reid, 'Beneficial Interest And The Land Registration Act Of 1979' [2017] SSRN Electronic
Journal.
6Joe Sampson, 'ESTOPPEL AND THE LAND REGISTRATION ACT 2002' (2016) 75 The Cambridge
Law Journal.
7Graham McBain, 'Modernising English Land Law' (2019) 8 International Law Research.

Law assignment 6
benefit. In this case, for example, Stacey should be enforced to follow the covenant of
maintaining the upkeep of the picket fence, as she gains benefit through the garden. This
aspect can be further understood through the review of Halsall v Brizell [1957] Ch 169,
where the covenant was supposed to ensure the upkeep of roads which was an agreement
which he agreed and followed like with the successor’ covenant. In such cases, the burden is
negative, and thus a restrictive covenant is noted, since, it will require. As per the Land
Charges Act 1925, the positive covenant can run in law, and is applicable for legal owners,
however, not for equitable owners8. Thus, if the covenant does not benefit the land, and is not
provided with any notice, is ignored by the user, then it can be applicable for only the legal
owners9. However, a restrictive covenant will run in equity owner if, the burden requires
expenditure, if the covenant was noticed at the time of the purchase, and if the covenant
benefits the covenanter’s land.
Equitable and Legal Rights
The understanding the impact of the covenant cannot be completed without
understanding the difference between legal and equitable ownership. As per the mandate of
the Supreme Court of Judicature Acts 1873 and 1875,in personamconcept (rights of the
certain categories applicable over the individual, as deemed fair legally and by value to the
land). While mostly the equitable rights are applicable in case the notice to these rights is
provided by the owners to the buyers at the time of the transfer of the property10. The
applicability/ enforceability of the equitable rights is also seen if the property is transferred to
another owner as a part of the gift, or as a part of mandate, which should have been obvious
to any purchaser11.The equitable right ownership would not be applicable if the purchaser was
not provided information regarding the trust status of the land, despite repeated request and
probing at the time of property research.
Theoretical concepts
When studying the concepts of land ownership, property rights and covenants; there is
a need to address the concepts of land and property in a comprehensive sense. For this reason,
the use of Locke’ theory of property is shown, where he notes that legitimacy of private
8J. Goldsworth, 'Trusts Of Land - Major Changes In The Law' (1996) 2 Trusts & Trustees.
9S. J. Bailey, 'Equitable (Proprietary) Estoppel—Land Charges Act 1925' (1968) 26 The Cambridge
Law Journal.
10Peter Limmer, 'Property Transactions And Certainty Of Title Transfer' (2013) 2 European Property
Law Journal.
11Charlotte Smith, 'A Curious Episode In The History Of Appellate Jurisdiction: The Supreme Court Of
Judicature Act 1873 And Ecclesiastical Appeals' (2011) 2008 Amicus Curiae.

Law assignment 7
property rights can be applied to the individual that are working (providing labour) for the
same12. In this sense, as well the principles of equitable ownership, and positive covenant can
be deciphered, that focused on aligning the ownership of land to the rights of maintenance of
the covenant or land and vice-a-versa. The concept further makes sense when evolutionary
theories are applied in the context of the property rights, where it is noted that the constant
development of the property is the reason for increased output towards the changing
buyer/purchaser role towards property13.
Application and reform recommendations
In the present case, there are four main stakeholders: Sonia, Zoe, Maria and Xenia.
The present section provides recommendations to Sonia, as she seeks legal counsel over the
covenants defined between the previous owners, and its implication and enforceability over
the new owners14. The details and the individual issues, along with their implications of the
land law and recommendation for improvement in the English land law as applicable for the
cases is shared hereafter,
1. Xenia
Issue
Xenia got the north side of the house, which she had purchased form Stacey. She has
been the owner of the place since last year. At present, she has been expected to mend the
fence separating the north and the south side of the property. Xenia has purchased her part of
the land from Stacey, who in turn had brought the land from Camilia. A covenant between
Camilia and Stacey (the original owner) has been agreed, where Stacey has agreed that she
would erect and maintain a fence between her garden and Camilla's.
Rule
When applying the land law in the present case, it is noted that the freehold property
was divided by Camelia, and hence, Stacey was deemed as an equitable owner, who was
expected to benefit from the law. For this she further agreed to covenant, thus showing that
12Alfonso Donoso, 'Toward A Liberal Theory Of Punishment: Locke, Property, And Individualism'
(2013) 8 World Political Science.
13Michael Davis, 'Locke (And Hobbes) On “Property” In The State Of Nature' (2013) 53 International
Philosophical Quarterly.
14T. R. W., 'Real Property — Restrictive Covenant — No Building Scheme — Covenants Not
Expressed To Be For The Benefit Of Adjacent Land—Covenants No Longer Effective—Declaration
By Court Under Law Of Property Act, 1925, S. 84, Sub-S. 2—Land Registration Act, 1925, S. 82.'
(1932) 4 The Cambridge Law Journal.

Law assignment 8
by labour she was an equitable owner as well15. Since Stacey has invested personally in the
property through building a fence, her stance as an equitable owner is further justified. When
land is transferred to another individual, their tangible and intangible aspects are also
transferable. In this sense, the application of the covenant between Stacey and Camelia
should have applied to the new owner as well. However, it appears that no obvious disclosure
of covenant and notice about the same was shared with Xenia.
Application
While Xenai can contest her role in the management of the additional aspects of her
ownership. It is noted that she gains benefit from the garden presented on the land, and is thus
liable to the equitable responsibilities associated with the land, as she is benefited by its
aspects as well. She is further acting as a new (transferred) owner, who has not noticed the
obvious aspect of the land responsibilitiesat the time of purchase, and is thus liable to act as
an equitable owner of the property16. Furthermore, the covenant mentioned in the present case
is not contractual, but restrictive, owing to the impact it has on the land.
Conclusion and reform recommendations
In the present context, Sonia who is facing the challenge owing to the lack of acceptance of
responsibilities by Xenia can contest the application of restrictive covenant for the latter.
There is a need to refine the clauses of notice to the equitable rights of the land for the
registered land in the English land law, since challenges much like Parish of Aston Cantlow v
Wallbank can arise in the comprehension of obligations towards the property17.
2. Maria
Issue
Camilla sold the East Side of her property to Kamran who in place sold it to Maria.
Initially, Kamran had covenanted to use the property as a single dwelling house only.
However, the same notice was not provided to Maria, and hence she opened an acupuncture
centre in her property.
15W. S., 'Real Property—Infant Heir Of Intestate—Settled Land Act, 1925, S. 1 — Death Of Infant
Unmarried—Devolution Of Estate—Administration Of Estates Act, 1925, S. 46, Sub-S. 1; S. 51, Sub-
S. 3.' (1932) 4 The Cambridge Law Journal.
16Cristen W. Dutcher, 'Engaging Legal And Ethical Environment Of Business Students With Create A
Law Days' (2019) 36 Journal of Legal Studies Education.
17Aruna Nair, 'Forgery And The Land Registration Act 2002: The Marginalisation Of Discretion' (2013)
24 King's Law Journal.

Law assignment 9
Rule
Here, as well the equitable rights of the owner might be contested, yet, it is noted that
the covenant is not restrictive in the present case, as the land is not impacted through the
introduction of the acupuncture unit. Furthermore, the covenant imposed is personal, and is
thus deemed as an affirmative covenant. As per the English law, the affirmative covenant run
with the land18.
Application
Here, the lack of contractual recording of the covenant entails that the covenant
agreed between Kamran and Camelia is not enforceable to the new owner. The application of
equitable rights is also not applicable here.
Conclusion and reform recommendations
Sonia cannot impose the covenant on Maria, and she is in full authority to run the
acupuncture establishment at her property since she was not informed about the covenant,
and it is an affirmative covenant. In an affirmative covenant, the application of personal issue
remains evident, however, the lack of guidelines regarding the impact even a personal issue
has on the “enjoyment” of the property for other freeholders is not discussed under the
English land law19. The same should be addressed, in context of civil or community
responsibility under property law, and reform in the clearer comprehension of the
responsibility should be provided20.
3. Zoe
Issue
The west side of the freehold property of Camelia was sold to Zaim. This is a registered
freehold property. A covenant was agreed between the two, stating that Zaim would maintain
the house in a good state of repair. Last years, Zaim sold West Side to Zoe who in effect
became the new legal owner of the property. At present, the gutters on Zoe's part of the house
are blocked with dirt and moss, which in turn is causing rainwater to run down and thus
damage the façade of West Side.
18Rhys Pippard, 'Trust In The Bank: The Importance Of Overreaching In English Land Law' [2011]
SSRN Electronic Journal.
19Sumitra Woodhull, 'A Voyage In Exploration Of Legal Aspects Of English Land Law' [2015] SSRN
Electronic Journal.
20Ulrich Drobnig, 'Transfer Of Property' [2010] SSRN Electronic Journal.

Law assignment 10
Rule
Application of the restrictive covenant and the legal rights of the property will be
applicable in the present case. Even as the original covenant does not contribute to the
“ease/enjoyment” of the property, it has an impact on the value of the property. The impact of
the property maintenance will be applicable for other owners, thus raising issues in terms of
personal civil obligations associated with the land21.
Application
In the present case, the notice of covenant was not shared with Zoe, which might
entail that she should be allowed to do what she wants with her property, including
deprecating its value, by not managing the aspect of her house repairs. However, in the
present case, the application of restrictive covenant is noted, as the impact of one side of the
property will lead to the deprecation of value for the entire property.
Conclusion and reform recommendations
At present, Zoe will be expected to repair her property, since the covenant though not
contractual and affirmative in action, has an impact on the overall value of the property, and
impacts the enjoyment of land for other owners of the freehold as well22. Even as the property
is not owned by Sonia individually, and hence she is not liable to impose easements for the
way of living in her property; any past covenant which has an impact on the land value will
run with the land, and hence will be applicable in the present case. Since the land law does
not provide clear indications with respect to the application of restrictive covenant, the legal
ownership is inapplicable here only, there is a need to reform this aspect of the English land
law and apply the equitable responsibility principles for the better consideration of the
stakeholders23.
Conclusion
Through the means of the present review, the case of Sonia and her other freeholder owners
of the property, and the critical advice for the stakeholders is shared. The review assesses
varied aspects of the property law under the English land law and notes that there remain
21Paul Vinogradoff, 'Transfer Of Land In Old English Law' (1907) 20 Harvard Law Review.
22Neil Duxbury, 'The Law Of The Land' (2015) 78 The Modern Law Review.
23'Federal Taxation: "Convenience Of The Employer" Rule Applied To Lodging On Property Not
Contiguous To Principal Place Of Business' (1965) 1965 Duke Law Journal.

Law assignment 11
some discrepancy and misrepresentation in the context of varied aspects of the property law24.
The focus of the report was to discuss the consequences and enforceability of covenants
amongst the new owners of the property (successors in title).
24Alan E. Land, 'Toward Optimal Land Use: Property Tax Policy And Land Use Planning' (1967) 55
California Law Review.

Law assignment 12
Reference
Bailey S, 'Equitable (Proprietary) Estoppel—Land Charges Act 1925' (1968) 26 The
Cambridge Law Journal
Davis M, 'Locke (And Hobbes) On “Property” In The State Of Nature' (2013) 53
International Philosophical Quarterly
Donoso A, 'Toward A Liberal Theory Of Punishment: Locke, Property, And Individualism'
(2013) 8 World Political Science
Drobnig U, 'Transfer Of Property' [2010] SSRN Electronic Journal
Dutcher C, 'Engaging Legal And Ethical Environment Of Business Students With Create A
Law Days' (2019) 36 Journal of Legal Studies Education
Duxbury N, 'The Law Of The Land' (2015) 78 The Modern Law Review
'Federal Taxation: "Convenience Of The Employer" Rule Applied To Lodging On Property
Not Contiguous To Principal Place Of Business' (1965) 1965 Duke Law Journal
Gardner S, 'The Land Registration Act 2002 - The Show On The Road' (2014) 77 The
Modern Law Review
Goldsworth J, 'Trusts Of Land - Major Changes In The Law' (1996) 2 Trusts & Trustees
I.L.L., 'Real Property—Vendor And Purchaser—Implied Right Of Way—Rectification Of
Conveyance—Law Of Property Act, 1925, S. 62' (1930) 4 The Cambridge Law Journal
Land A, 'Toward Optimal Land Use: Property Tax Policy And Land Use Planning' (1967) 55
California Law Review
Lees E, 'INDEMNITY AND THE LAND REGISTRATION ACT 2002' (2014) 73 The
Cambridge Law Journal
Limmer P, 'Property Transactions And Certainty Of Title Transfer' (2013) 2 European
Property Law Journal
McBain G, 'Modernising English Land Law' (2019) 8 International Law Research

Law assignment 13
Nair A, 'Forgery And The Land Registration Act 2002: The Marginalisation Of Discretion'
(2013) 24 King's Law Journal
Pippard R, 'Trust In The Bank: The Importance Of Overreaching In English Land Law'
[2011] SSRN Electronic Journal
Reid K, 'Beneficial Interest And The Land Registration Act Of 1979' [2017] SSRN Electronic
Journal
Sampson J, 'ESTOPPEL AND THE LAND REGISTRATION ACT 2002' (2016) 75 The
Cambridge Law Journal
Smith C, 'A Curious Episode In The History Of Appellate Jurisdiction: The Supreme Court
Of Judicature Act 1873 And Ecclesiastical Appeals' (2011) 2008 Amicus Curiae
T. R. W., 'Real Property — Restrictive Covenant — No Building Scheme — Covenants Not
Expressed To Be For The Benefit Of Adjacent Land—Covenants No Longer Effective—
Declaration By Court Under Law Of Property Act, 1925, S. 84, Sub-S. 2—Land Registration
Act, 1925, S. 82.' (1932) 4 The Cambridge Law Journal
Vinogradoff P, 'Transfer Of Land In Old English Law' (1907) 20 Harvard Law Review
W. S., 'Real Property—Infant Heir Of Intestate—Settled Land Act, 1925, S. 1 — Death Of
Infant Unmarried—Devolution Of Estate—Administration Of Estates Act, 1925, S. 46, Sub-
S. 1; S. 51, Sub-S. 3.' (1932) 4 The Cambridge Law Journal
Warren J, 'The Law Of Property Act, 1922' (1923) 21 Michigan Law Review
Woodhull S, 'A Voyage In Exploration Of Legal Aspects Of English Land Law' [2015]
SSRN Electronic Journal
.