Where a person (A) asserts an overriding interest against a purchaser (P) of registered land, and does so on the basis of his “actual occupation” at the material time, he cannot rely upon the fact that the land was occupied by a company. This is so even though A was regularly present in his capacity as director and/or owner of the company: see Lloyd v Dugdale [2001] 48 EG 129 (CS), taking yet another hard judicial look at para (g) of section 70(1) of the Land Registration Act 1925.
It would be otherwise, of course, if A had been present in his personal capacity, or if he had (even out of occupation) been receiving rent from the company.
The same case also affirms (following Ashburn Anstalt v WJ Arnold & Co (No 1) [1989] Ch 1) that P does not incur liability as trustee simply because the land was expressly conveyed subject to the claim being made by A.
Where a person (A) asserts an overriding interest against a purchaser (P) of registered land, and does so on the basis of his “actual occupation” at the material time, he cannot rely upon the fact that the land was occupied by a company. This is so even though A was regularly present in his capacity as director and/or owner of the company: see Lloyd v Dugdale [2001] 48 EG 129 (CS), taking yet another hard judicial look at para (g) of section 70(1) of the Land Registration Act 1925.
It would be otherwise, of course, if A had been present in his personal capacity, or if he had (even out of occupation) been receiving rent from the company.
The same case also affirms (following Ashburn Anstalt v WJ Arnold & Co (No 1) [1989] Ch 1) that P does not incur liability as trustee simply because the land was expressly conveyed subject to the claim being made by A.
