Law of Property: Cases on St. Peter Street Analysis and Evaluation

This report analyzes three property law cases concerning properties on St. Peter Street, evaluating the implications of the Law of Property and the Land Registration Act 2002. The first case involves Holly and Fred, joint tenants of a freehold property, and the inheritance dispute after Fred's death. The report explores Holly's rights and potential legal actions. The second case examines a property owned by four friends, Rachel, Ellie, Sophie, and Larisa, highlighting issues arising from the failure to file a Section 10 (Declaration of Trust) in the TR1 form and the implications for Larisa's share. The report discusses potential solutions and legal recourse for the co-owners. The third case involves Aimee and Nathan, who were joint tenants. Nathan severed the joint tenancy before Aimee's death, and the report analyzes the legal consequences and Nathan's subsequent rights. The report concludes by emphasizing the importance of proper property management and adherence to legal procedures in property-related matters.

Law property CW 1

Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................1
MAIN BODY.........................................................................................................................1
No. 1.......................................................................................................................................1
No. 2.......................................................................................................................................2
No. 3.......................................................................................................................................4
CONCLUSION ...............................................................................................................................5
REFERENCES................................................................................................................................6

INTRODUCTION
Laws are to be followed and implemented in order to be managed and handled with
appropriate measure. Especially, the Law of Property is required evaluated and implemented
with care. The report will analyse the cases related to 3 different properties on St. Peter Street.
This evaluation will showcase various implications and impact of Law of Property and
various other problems related to it with proper solution to these problems to get appropriate
outcomes 1.
MAIN BODY
The evaluation of three cases at St. Peter's street is as follows:
No. 1
Holly and Fred purchased a freehold property at St. Peter Street in the year 2013.
Although being married for about 40 years, they were not happy and yet they didn't separate. As
per the Land Registration Law, their registry showcases them as the joint tenant of their
purchased property. However, they didn't have children or relatives to inherit it. In such a case,
Fred intended to inherit his property to his golfing friend, Jim. He even started telling everyone
about it.
Now, when Fred had died suddenly last week, it has been found that his will indeed
involved Jim to inherit Fred's share in No. 1 property at St. Peter Street. So Holly is worried as
she has to leave the house and she don't have any other accommodation facility or asset on her
name. Thus, in this case, she can plea in court for providing her with proper part or
compensation of his share in property 2.
According to Land Registration of Property, both Holly and Fred were joint tenants of
the house. Thus, she has an equal share in the house. Further, she has no other savings or assets
in her name and is completely dependent on the property No.1 for her stay.
Look at this condition, she can make the Land registration documents of the house
evidence and can present her case and condition to the Court of Law. The Court can see through
1 Janis, M.D. And et.al., 2016. IP and antitrust: an analysis of antitrust principles applied to
intellectual property law. Wolters Kluwer Law & Business.
2 Torremans, P., 2016. Holyoak and Torremans intellectual property law. Oxford
University Press.
1

the will of Fred and land registration documents and can give an appropriate solution to Holly for
her stay in their purchased property.
However, the chance of Holly to get appropriate support from property is quite high and
for Jim they are meagre. As per the Law of Property Act and Section 4 of Land Registration Act
2002, the freehold property has been registered in the name of joint tenants can be easily
transferrable to other person in the form of sale, gift or other methods like rent, mortgage etc.
Holly as to found out her title in the property and based on the Title, she can apply for a
stay order and legal notice over the acquisition of property by Jim. As the freehold property
possess certain restrictions. As per section 11 of law, the titleholder over property has to prove
his/her claim over the freehold property in order to get the guarantee in respect to hold over
property 3. As Fred and Holly were joint tenants on freehold property, Holly must prove her
share over property in form of possessory freehold title. This will allow her to have a lease over
the property for 12 years. As the property is required to be maintained effectively, Holly can use
this title to maintain her share in property. Besides this, she can ask Jim to allow her to use the
property as a tenant till she arranges another accommodation facility for herself.
The court can look after the application of Holly in order to handle the actions and to
maintain her claim over freehold property. If she gets successful in proving her claim, Jim has to
provide her the stay in property in return of her share. Being the joint tenants in the property, she
has right to take decision in the inheritance and delivering of the property to Jim4. She posses
legal right to deny acquisition of freehold property through the medium of inheritance by Jim on
basis of Fred's will. Under the Section 29 of LRA 2002, purchaser or inheritor of property has to
get a clearance or NOC (No objection certificate) from present tenants or co owner of property in
order to get control over same .
No. 2
The No. 2 property is a 4-bedrooms house owned by four friends named Rachel, Ellie,
Sophie and Larisa, who purchased it 9 years ago, as none of them could afforded it on their own.
When original application of land registration was completed, they failed to file the Section 10
(Declaration of trust) of TR1 form that helps in maintaining the relation of co tenants as the
3 Pound, R. and DeRosa, M.L., 2017. An introduction to the philosophy of law. Routledge.
4 Berkowitz, D., Lin, C. and Ma, Y., 2015. Do property rights matter? Evidence from a
property law enactment. Journal of Financial Economics, 116(3), pp.583-593.
2

holding co owner of a property. Now as Larrisa has been fallen apart and is not in a good enough
financial condition to sell her share to someone else, she wants to know about her status in the
ownership of house and whether he or she would receive any share of interest, following the
same current living situation.
In this case, the property is successfully registered in the name of one of the main co
owners of property. Now the property has to be shared among all the tenants equally, thus the
entire group of co owner possess an equal share of right and interest within belongings.
However, the major drawback they have to face that although the contract has been followed
effectively for many years, when one of the co owner in property will decide to fall apart within
the property, it will create an issue of distribution and declaration of share among the co owners.
As 4 of the ladies failed to file the section 10(Declaration of Trust) in TR 1 form of the Land
registration, inheriting or passing off the property will be a major issue for them5. They have to
look after this matter as the joint tenant. The passing on of the title and share has to be made
under the joint property ownership legislation of the LRA 2002, Larrisa is liable to ask for her
share in the co owned property. According to the case study, she is not in a condition to share or
sell off her share in the property. As the declaration of trust is not been registered within the
registration, they are susceptible to face the issues related to the sharing of house or any interest
related to it. As the co owners of the house failed to declare a trustee, they can now opt for a
legal help in order to refile the TR1 form with the common acceptance. Other than this, the other
three ladies can ask for a notice to Larrisa for falling off. In return, Larrisa is legally eligible to
get the details about her share in the house and if the property is been sold out, than her share of
interest 6.
The court can involve in this case by taking the liability to get the following of regulation
related to TR1 form. Larrisa can get the help from the court of law in order to get her share in the
property. The proper management of sharing of claim and part in a property has to be handled
under the Property law. As the concerning asset is been legally registered, it can be sold off,
mortgaged or been given on lease without any restriction. As per the shares of interest in it is
5 Holbrook, T.R. And et.al., 2018. Brief of Intellectual Property Law Scholars As Amici
Curiae in Support of Neither Party, WesternGeco LLC v. Ion Geophysical Corp., No. 16-
1011, US Supreme Court.
6 Bridge, M., 2015. Personal property law. OUP Oxford.
3

been concerned, it is dependent on decision of all the four co owners of the property. They have
to carry out proper communication and get the effective liability regarding the management of
property, in a legal way. Other than this, the proper obligations and following of the laws and
rules or regulations related to the management of property are to be followed by the concerning
co owners. They have to look after the sharing and handling of their interest related to the house
in order to maintain their personal relations and sorting out of this issue on the basis of effective
communication and mutual understanding. Other than this, they have to maintain the ethicalness
while observing the proper distribution of interest related to the house 7.
No. 3
Aimee and Nathan purchased the property named No. 3 when they married in 2012.
During registration, they filed the claim as joint tenants for the property. After some times the
relationship turned to be unhappy. Looking at the chances of filing a divorce, Nathan, being
aware of legal rights, take the step to sever the joint tenancy of the claim on house. He sent the
notice as a recorded letter, post to himself before the arrival of Aimee. Prior to her arrival, he
receives the letter, signs it and place it in drawer. While returning, Aimee met with and air crash
and dies. Nathan regrets his decision to sever the tenancy and part away from her.
In this case, Nathan has followed the severance of the joint tenancy by the legal manner,
with her wife, Aimee. According to Law of property and Land Registration Act 2002, if the
contract or agreement related to joint tenancy is been broken or terminated, the other co tenants
automatically becomes the owner of the property. Other than this, the severing of the joint
tenancy will convert the joint tenants to tenants in Common. The severing process is been carried
out on the basis of LRA 2002, that is been governed by an estate planner or a solicitor. The legal
registry of the property or a house is been sent on the address of severing tenants along with the
Deed of Severance. This agreement is then signed by one of the tenants and thus will lead the
joint tenants to get transferred in the state of tenants in Common. Nathan, being aware about her
legal rights over this, followed the discussed process and was waiting for the response of his
wife, Aimee. But, she died unexpectedly and thus, as per the legal obligation and processes, he
becomes the sole owner and tenants of the house.
7 Jing, J., 2016. Legal construction of the new internet property interests from the
perspective of the internet traffic right. Science of Law (Journal of Northwest University
of Political Science and Law), 3, p.019.
4

Thus, the concerning person will look after the property and can get any of their mutual
friend to enter in agreement as either the joint tenants or the tenants in Common. This will help
him to maintain the contract related to the ownership of the house. This will help Nathan to get
the proper return from the house or the property8. It can further lead to the re entering of land
registry with new entrant or tenants. As some of his mutual friends were aware about his plan to
sever the tenancy of house with Aimee, they can offer him the proposal to enter into the contract
or tenancy with Nathan. Now being the sole owner and tenants of the house, he is liable to take
the decision to allow the people applying for tenancy. Also, being the lone survivor of property,
he will own the complete interest related to the house. Thus, in this case he can plan for the
effective management of the property owned by him. Also, if Nathan accepts the proposal of
allowing a co tenants, he possesses the right to keep the maximum share of interest within the
property by himself under the contract.
CONCLUSION
Thus, on basis of the report and evaluation f the various cases related to Land registry Act
2002 and Law of Property, this can be concluded that the proper management of the property is a
very critical and crucial part, that has to be looked after by the tenants. The effective assessment
of roles related to actions like sharing of interest in property or termination of joint tenancy on
freehold property, or inheriting the property as a gift or after death. The proper legal procedure
and measures are required to be followed in order to get the appropriate and suitable output.
8 Disch, L., 2016. Representation. In The Oxford Handbook of Feminist Theory.
5

REFERENCES
Books and journals
Janis, M.D. And et.al., 2016. IP and antitrust: an analysis of antitrust principles applied to
intellectual property law. Wolters Kluwer Law & Business.
Torremans, P., 2016. Holyoak and Torremans intellectual property law. Oxford University Press.
Pound, R. and DeRosa, M.L., 2017. An introduction to the philosophy of law. Routledge.
Berkowitz, D., Lin, C. and Ma, Y., 2015. Do property rights matter? Evidence from a property
law enactment. Journal of Financial Economics, 116(3), pp.583-593.
Holbrook, T.R. And et.al., 2018. Brief of Intellectual Property Law Scholars As Amici Curiae in
Support of Neither Party, WesternGeco LLC v. Ion Geophysical Corp., No. 16-1011, US
Supreme Court.
Bridge, M., 2015. Personal property law. OUP Oxford.
Waelde, C. and et.al., 2016. Contemporary intellectual property: law and policy.
Jing, J., 2016. Legal construction of the new internet property interests from the perspective of
the internet traffic right. Science of Law (Journal of Northwest University of Political
Science and Law), 3, p.019.
Disch, L., 2016. Representation. In The Oxford Handbook of Feminist Theory.
McDonnell, J.B. And et.al., 2017. The Impact of Revised Article 9 on Security Interests in
Intellectual Property. Secured Transactions Under the UCC, 1.
6

Lemley, M.A., 2016. Symposium: Notice and Notice Failure in Intellectual Property Law.
Boston University, School of Law.
7