Court of Appeal considers the detail required for unilateral notices
On 23 January 2014, the Court of Appeal accepted the arguments of Walker Morris’s client, Bank of Scotland, in the first reported case to analyse the proper content of and protection provided by a unilateral notice registered in the charges register to a property.
On 10 March 2005, Mr S bought a flat on a long lease from a development company. On the same day, Mr S assigned the lease to Ms J, but her title was not registered until much later. She purchased the property with the benefit of a mortgage provided by the bank, which took a charge over the property, also dated 10 March. Mr S used the mortgage monies to pay for his purchase of the property from the development company. The bank was, therefore, subrogated to the developer’s unpaid vendor’s lien. On the same day, Mr S purportedly granted a company, Wingfield Financial Heritage, another charge over the property intended to secure a personal guarantee for another individual.
The completion solicitors failed to register Ms J as proprietor or the bank’s mortgage at the Land Registry. Accordingly, on 4 July 2006, the bank registered a unilateral notice against the charges register to the property. It read: ‘in respect of a mortgage dated 10 March 2005 in favour of Bank of Scotland’. The bank was, however, able to register its charge in February 2011 when Ms J was registered as proprietor of the property. Prior to that, however, in April 2010, Wingfield registered its charge against the property…
Click on the link below to read the rest of the Walker Morris briefing.
News from Walker Morris
News from The Lawyer
Briefings from Walker Morris
The well-known US TV series Glee has been on the wrong end of a High Court trademark infringement action.
Cosmetics manufacturer Lush has successfully claimed against the online retailer Amazon for trademark infringement.
Analysis from The Lawyer
The law school war shows no signs of ending. But we have, perhaps, reached the end of the beginning.
New EU rules and lawyers’ increased comfort with digital formats are sparking a sea-change in the way law firms manage their documents