Barclays Bank v Guy [electronic resource]
Barclays Bank v Guy [electronic resource]
- 2008
[2008] EWCA Civ 452, 9 April 2008. Case raised issues of the alteration of the land register and whether rectification was available to set aside charge on ground of mistake. Development land owned by the appellant was transferred to a Gibraltar company in 2004, which became registered as the proprietor. the claimant maintained that the sum due to him for the land of £15 million had not been paid. In 2005 the company executed a charge over the land (£100 million plus) in favour of the respondent bank to secure indebtedness and then went into liquidation. The respondent sought to sell the land as mortgagee; the appellant asserted that he was still the beneficial owner and the respondent brought proceedings against the appellant to clear his title. Appellant sought to have the title transferred into his own name free from the charge as he asserted that the land had been procured fraudulently. Held: permission to appeal was refused - appellant could show that registration of original transfer was a mistake if it was the result of a forgery, since the registration of something that is not properly executed by the registered proprietor must be a mistake. However, the mistake he was required to show was in respect of the registration of the charge and there was no such mistake of that kind made.
BARCLAYS BANK PLC V GUY
LAND REGISTRATION ACT 2002
LAND REGISTRATION ACT 2002 (SCHEDULE 4)
COMPANIES ACT 1985
FRETWELL V GRAVES
United Kingdom--
[2008] EWCA Civ 452, 9 April 2008. Case raised issues of the alteration of the land register and whether rectification was available to set aside charge on ground of mistake. Development land owned by the appellant was transferred to a Gibraltar company in 2004, which became registered as the proprietor. the claimant maintained that the sum due to him for the land of £15 million had not been paid. In 2005 the company executed a charge over the land (£100 million plus) in favour of the respondent bank to secure indebtedness and then went into liquidation. The respondent sought to sell the land as mortgagee; the appellant asserted that he was still the beneficial owner and the respondent brought proceedings against the appellant to clear his title. Appellant sought to have the title transferred into his own name free from the charge as he asserted that the land had been procured fraudulently. Held: permission to appeal was refused - appellant could show that registration of original transfer was a mistake if it was the result of a forgery, since the registration of something that is not properly executed by the registered proprietor must be a mistake. However, the mistake he was required to show was in respect of the registration of the charge and there was no such mistake of that kind made.
BARCLAYS BANK PLC V GUY
LAND REGISTRATION ACT 2002
LAND REGISTRATION ACT 2002 (SCHEDULE 4)
COMPANIES ACT 1985
FRETWELL V GRAVES
United Kingdom--