Page images
PDF
[graphic]

CORRESPONDENCE. THE LAND TRANSFER ACT, I807. [T0 the Editor of the Solicitors’ Jourmzl.]

Sir,- -The London County Council having invited the view of the City Corporation and the London Vestries on the proposal to select the County of London for experimentally enforcing compulsory registration of title on the sale of land, the Land Registry Otfice has sent to these bodies a paper headed “ Statement of the Methods and Results of Registration of Title to Land.” The following quotations from the oflicial statement and observations thereon will indicate how misleading the statement is in many respects, and how dangerous the experiment is that the county council is asked to sanction.

“ A register of title is a book kept like the registers of stocks, shares in com anies and ships, whereby the owners of property in land are enabled to transfer or charge it by a simple entry without any delay and at a very small expense.”—No reference is made to the fact that the expense of getting on the register will be an addition to the charges at present payable for completing a transfer or charge. The reference to a register of stocks, &c., is not in point, as three different certificates of title are issuable in the case of land—(a) absolute, (b) qualified, (c) possessory. The expense and delay of obtaining an absolute title will be practically prohibitory. A qualified title appears to have been already criticized out of existence, as no reference whatever is made to it in the statement. A possessory title affords no guarantee, and consequently the certificate will, for many years at least, simply be an additional expense to the present costs of selling or mortgaging property.

“ Fraud and error are rendered extremely difificult."—This cannot easily be reconciled with the statement that transfers can be made by a simple entry “ without any delay and at a very small expense.”

“The system . . . has been in successful operation for over thirty years in the Australian Colonies.”—The system in the Colonies is essentially different. The Torrens Act is apermissive Act, and only absolute titles can be registered under it.

“It has also been tried . . . in this country. Many landowners have testified to the benefits they have obtained.”-The testimonials referred to have not been published. Many landowners have testified publicly to the contrary.

“There are between 4,000 and 5,000 estates now on the register of an aggregate value of over £1~l,000,000, and an extent of over 100,000 acres.”—~As each estate has a number, there is a suggestive vagueness in giving the numbers as “ between 4,000 and 5,000.” Assuming the numbers to be 4,500, the yearly average since 1862, when the oflice was first established, work out as follows: 130 estates, £371,430 value, and 2,850 acres. These figures only represent a small fraction of the yearly average of the transactions that have been carried out outside of the oflice.

“ In order to obtain . . . registration . . . the applicant or his solicitor will have to take or post the purchase deed after it is executed to the Land Registry . . . with a copy and a tracing of the plan (if any) thereon. If no plan is on the deed a plan on the Ordnance map will be required instead. If the Ordnance map is not up to date a landgplgistry surveyor will correct it without charge.”— These provisions ' give some indication of the additional expense and delay that registration will involve, as it will be noticed that resort is only made to the office after the deed is executed. The lar e majority of London houses are at prcsent transferred without a plan. The Ordnance map is not accepted in courts as evidence, so it is difiicult to say what will be its value on a deed that has to be produced in court. The correcting of Ordnance maps by the land registry surveyors is not a light undertaking, and is calculated to prevent the registration being effected “ by a simple entry without any delay.”

“The fee payable, which will include every incidental expense, will be as follows: Value of land not exceeding £1,000, 1s. 6d. for every £25 or part of £25.”—If a solicitor is em loyed his charges will obviously be in addition to the official fees. Kt the present time the ad valorem stamp duty on a purchase is 10s. per cent. Purchasers of small properties consider this a sufiiciently heavy charge. It is doubtful if they will approve of the additional 6s. per cent., making the ad valorem duty 16s. per cent. It is assumed that the same ees will apply to mortgages. In this case, as the ad valorem stamp duty on a mortgage is 2s. 6d. per cent., the ad valorem duties will be increased to Ss. 6d. per cent.

“These fees have been carefullfly arranged . . . so as to pay all expenses and to leave a su cient surplus for safety.”—As no experience has yet been gained of the results of compulsory registration it is conceivable that the fees may not prove suflicient. In that case the taxpayer will have to make up the deficiency—~a somewhat serious liability to arise out of private transactions between individuals with which the tax ayer has no concern.

“The Land Registry will djraw up draft entries for the register,

[graphic]
[graphic]

‘ and in a few days the deed will be returned to the applicant, and the

draft entries will be settled with him.”—The few “ days ” may easily become a few weeks if the deed is at all complicated, or if there is any pressure of work in the office, or if the Ordnance maps have to be corrected. In any of these events it will not be possible to foretell when a matter will be completed.

“ A landowner registered with absolute title can sell or mortgage without the delay and expense incidental to investigation of title or dealings with unregistered land."—The experience of registration has hitherto been the exact opposite of what is alleged. The many landowners who are known to have taken their titles ofl’ the register after incurring the trouble and expense of putting them on would not have done so without good reason.

“ A landowner registered with possessory title can transfer and ohargle his land by the same instruments and with the same simp "city in point of form and for the same fees as if the title were absolute/’—This statement is inexplicable. It seems to imply that an absolute and possessory title are identical. In practice, in the case of possessory certificates, the titles will have to be investigated and deeds will have to be prepared as they are at present. '

" If an absolute title is desired the applicant will have to prove the title to the Registrar in a similar manner to that used on sales and mortgages under the ordinary practice of conveyancing. The Registrar has power under the Act of 1875 to accept a good “ holding title,’ though open to technical objection.”—At the present time purchases are almost invariably completed under contracts which limit the length of title and restrict investigation. There is every reason to believe the Registrar will not accept such limits or restrictions. There are no statistics available to prove that he has ever availed himself of the power given by the Act of 1875 to accept a title open to technical objection. The absence of figures that could have been given is significant. The fees that will be payable on registration of an absolute title are not given.

“ Under the old system absolute simplicity and security are never obtainable, for as fast as old difiiculties are cleared new ones arise to fill their places.”—This statement is open to serious comment. Conveyancing has, in fact, been immensely simplified by the Conveyancing Act, 1881, and titles can now be investigated and tho large majority of matters can be completed with an expedition with which the proposed system cannot compete.

“ No person is allowed to inspect the register without the written authority of the registered proprietor or of his solicitor.”—At the present time the Middlesex Registry can be searched without any restriction, and this right is of great value to creditors and others. The right of search should not, it is submitted, be taken away in the case of registered lands.

“ Bankers and others will be enabled to make advances on deposit of land certificate with even greater ease and security than they can now on deposit of title deeds.”—At the present time a customer deposits his deeds with a bank, and there and then he obtains an advance practically without expense. A mere assertion is not suflicient to prove that the present practice will be simplified. The new system may, on the contrary, greatly hamper such trans

t'ons

ac 1 . “ In addition to the recent revision of the Ordnance map and the natural claim of the metropolis to precedence in enjoying the benefit of the Act, one great practical reason for selecting London for the first compulsory district is that there is already a registry of deeds for the greater part of its area.”—-While it is a matter of the greatest difliculty to discover what the “ benefit of the Act ” will be, the metropolis may not be unwilling to waive its “ natural claim . . . to precedence.” It may be the more willing to do so because it may not see the advantage of giving up its present system of registry of deeds for a system that has hitherto been an admitted failure. It is and will remain open to any London landowner to voluntarily register his title, and he may be excused if he prefers to retain this option to being compelled to adopt a system which may gravely depreciate his property. J . S. Runmsrnm. 5, Raymond-buildings, Gray’s-inn, Dec. 2-1.

[To the Editor of the Solicitors’ JournaZ.]

Sir,—Mr. Lake’s letter in your issue of 25th inst. is disappointing. Nor does it, I am convinced, represent the views of the legal profession. The President of 1888-9 was much more in accord with these, and one regrets the “ falling off.”

Mr. Lake states that the London County Council is not likely to wholly veto the application of the Act to the County of London, and he urges the limitation of the order to that part of the county served by the Middlesex Deeds Registry.

Is he aware that this is the very part of the county most strongly opposed to the Act, and in which many of the local authorities have pronounced against the proposed experiment P Will Mr. Lake contend that it is right to force the Act upon this district in the face of these pronouncements I"

[graphic]

It has been my duty to ex lain the provisions of the Act in more than one quarter and I havegaeen surprised at the unanimity of the condemnation elicited as soon as the question was understood.

The London County Council may have its faults. It must be recognized, however, that most of its members are practical business men who would scarcely ask the local authorities for an opinion merely to disregard it.

Have we not had suflicient preachin of the gospel of expediency? Is not the question still what it was when Mr. Brickdale stated it in the following words: “No system really beneficial to landowners would require to be forced upon them, and, of course, to apply compulsion to any system not really beneficial would be a wild injustice ? ”

London, Dec. 29th. A Soucrroa.

[blocks in formation]

First Reg|'strati'o'n. of Settled Land.

2. Application for registration of settled land may be made by any person capable of being registered as proprietor, with the consent of the other persons (if any) whose consent or concurrence is necessary to a sale by that person.

3. In the case of possessory title the proper restriction shall be left with the application, or the Registrar shall be furnished with the information necessary to enable him to draw the proper restriction.

4. In framing restrictions and inhibitions for the protection of settled land, it shall not be the duty of the trustees or of the Registrar to protect the interests of any person who would not have been a necessary party to a sale or mortgage thereof if the land had been unregistered; but it shall be the duty of the trustees, or, if there are no trustees, of the Registrar, to give notice of the restrictions and inhibitions to such of the beneficiaries (if any) as the Registrar shall direct; and any such person can, if he wishes, lodge a caution or apply for an inhibition.

5. The restrictions and inhibitions 'ven in Forms 1 to 5 in the Schedule hereto shall apply respectivgly to the various cases in the Schedule set forth.

6. The settlement, whether consisting of one or of several documents, or a copy or abstract thereof, may be left in the Registry for reference and safe custody. It shall not be referred to on the register, but shall be filed in a separate place under the number of the title to which it relates.

Transfers of Land into Settlement.

7. An instrument of transfer of land to the uses of a settlement may be in one of the Forms 6 to 12 in the Schedule hereto, and shall contain the proper restrictions or inhibitions to be entered on the register, according to the principles stated in Rule 4 of these Rules. The transfer shall be signed by the tenant for life (if any, and if of f iill age). as well as by the transferor and transferee, and all signatures shall be verified.

8. On receipt of an instrument of transfer in such form as aforesaid, the Registrar shall register the transferee named therein as the proprietor of the land, and shall enter on the Register the inhibitions and restrictions contained in the transfer.

9. If it appears to the Registrar that any restriction or inhibition contained in the transfer thus applied for is unreasonable or contrary to the principle on which the register is kept, or calculated to cause unnecessary inconvenience, he may requ.ire the production of the settlement and an abstract or copy thereof, and any further evidence that may be necessary for the purpose of determining, and he shall determine (subject to an appeal to the Court), what restrictions and inhibitions, if any, ought to be registered, and the form thereof.

10. It shall not otherwise be the duty of the Registrar to inquire into the terms of the settlement, but, if the parties desire it, the settlement, or a copy or abstract thereof, may be deposited in the Registry for safe custody and future reference.

ll. Where registered land has been brought into settlement, and the existing registered proprietor is the tenant for life under the settlement, and he elects to remain the registered proprietor thereof, it will only be necessary for him to appl for the registration of a restriction and inhibition in Form 1 in the Schedule hereto, or such other restriction or inhibition as may be uired, having regard to tothe terms of the settlement and the Settilfi Land Acts.

[graphic]

C’/iarges. 12. A charge to secure an annuity may be in Form 13 in the Schedule hereto.

13. An application to alter the terms of a registered charge under section 9 (5) of the Act of 1897 may be in Form H in the Schedule hereto, and shall be signed by the registered proprietor of the charge, and by the registered proprietor of the land, and of every charge of equal or inferior priority prejudicially affected by it, and the signatures shall be verified.

Transmissions of Land on Death.

14. On production of the probate or letters of administration of a sole (or sole surviving) registered proprietor of land, dying after 1897, the personal representative named therein shall be registered as proprietor in the place of the deceased proprietor, with the addition of the words, “ Executor (or Administrator) of deceased."

15. On production of the probate, or letters of administration with will annexed, and of an assent or appropriation in either of the Forms 15 or 16 in the Schedule hereto, or of an instrument of transfer by the personal representative in the usual prescribed Form, and of the probate or letters of administration, the devisee or legatee named in the assent or appropriation or the transferee named in the instrument of transfer shall be registered as proprietor of the land in place of the deceased proprietor. The signatures of the executor or administrator to the assent, appropriation, or transfer shall be verified.

16. Where a settlement is created by the will, or otherwise arises in consequence of the death, of a sole registered proprietor, the personal representative shall, at the proper time, and with the consent of the tenant for life (if of full age) leave in the Registry, together with the probate or letters of administration, a written application for the registration of a proprietor, with the proper restrictions and inhibitions, according to the rginciples stated in section 6 of the Act of 1897 and Rule 4 of these ules.

17. On receipt of such an application, the Registrar shall register the pro rietor and the inhibitions and restrictions therein named and applied for.

18. If it ap ears to the Registrar that any restriction or inhibition contained in the application is unreasonable or contrary to the principle on which the register is keplt, or calculated to cause unnecessary inconvenience, he may require t e production of the probate (if any) or an abstract of copy thereof, and any further evidence that may be necessary for the purpose of determining, and he shall determine (subject to an appeal to the Court), what restrictions and inhibitions, if any, ought to be registered, and the form thereof.

19. It shall not otherwise be the duty of the Registrar to inquire into the terms of the will, but, if the arties desire it, the probate, or a copy or abstract thereof, may be diaposited in the Registry for safe custody and future reference.

20. Where the trustees of a settlement apply, on the death of a tenant for life, for the registration of a successor under the settlement, they and their solicitor shall make a statutory declaration to the effect that the deceased proprietor was tenant for life, and that they are the trustees of the settlement, and that the person for whose registration they are applying is the successor under the settlement, and that the restrictions and inhibitions (if any) applied for are the proper ones to be entered, or that no restrictions or inhibitions are required. In any case in which the Registrar may deem it desirable that the declaration shall be accompanied by a certificate of counsel to the like effect, a certificate to his satisfaction shall be produced.

21. Where such a declaration (and certificate, if required), are produccd, the Registrar need not require production of the settlement or any further evidence, but where not produced he shall inquire into the terms of the settlement, and shall satisfy himself that the proper entries are made on the register.

22. If, on the death of a tenant for life, registered as proprietor of land, the trustees of the settlement neglect to apply for the registration of the new proprietor in his place, or if there areno such trustees, any person interested under the settlement may apply for the registration of a new proprietor. The Registrar shall thereupon inquire into the terms of t e settlement, and shall settle draft entries for the register on the principles stated in section 6 of the Act of 1897 and Rule 4 of these Rules in regard to settled land, and shall give notice thereof to the trustees of the settlement (if any) and to the new tenant for life, and to such _othe_r persons (if any) as he may think fit; and if no valid objection is made thereto shall enter the new proprietor or proprietors accordingly.

Traiwmissions on Bankruptcy.

23. On production to the Registrar of an order of a court having jurisdiction in bankruptcy, declaring a proprietor a bankrupt, together with a certificate signed y the oflicia receiver that any registered land or charge is part of the property of the bankrupt, ivisible

[graphic]

K amongst his creditors, the official receiver may be registered as proprietor in his place.

24. On production of such an order as last mentioned and of an order appointing a trustee, the trustee may be registered as proprietor.

25. If the oflioial receiver has not been registered as proprietor, the order appointing the trustee, with a certificate signed by the trustee that the land or charge is part of the property of the bankrupt, divisible amongst his creditors, shall be produced to the Registrar.

26. In the liquidation of a company, any resolution or order appointing a liquidator may be filed and referred to on the register, an , when so registered, shall be deemed to be in force until it is cancelled or superseded on the Register.

Instruments under Section 9 (6) of the Act of 1897.

27. An instrument executed under the 6th sub-section of the 9th section of the Act of 1897 by a person entitled to be registered as proprietor of land, or of a charge, before he has been registered as such, shall be in the same form as is prescribed for registered dispositions by the registered proprietor.

28. Such an instrument shall not be registered until the person executing it has been registered as proprietor, or his right to be so registered has been shown to the satisfaction of the Registrar.

29. Where such an instrument deals with a portion of the land comprised in a title or with a charge not yet entered on the register, the form may be varied so far as may be necessary to identify the land or charge dealt with.

Notices as to Death Duties.

30. Where, upon an examination of title made on the first registration of land, the Registrar finds that there is, or may arise, any liability to death duties of the kind mentioned in section 13 of the Act of 1897, he shall enter notice thereof in the register according to Form 17 in the Schedule hereto.

31. Where, on the death of a registered proprietor of land his personal representatives are registered as such under Rule 14 of these Rules, notice of liability to duty shall not be entered.

32. If the personal representatives of a deceased pro rietor of land assent to a devise or appropriation, or transfer land) to any person otherwise than by sale, notice of the liability to duty shall be entered unless there is produced either :

(a.) Proof to the satisfaction of the Registrar that all duty payable in respect of land by reason of the death of the proprietor has been paid or satisfied, or

(b.) A certificate from the Commissioners of Inland Revenue in Form 18 in the Schedule hereto, or to that effect, or

(c.) Proof to the satisfaction of the Registrar that the ap licant is entitled to the land in such a capacity that any liability to duty would not affect a purchaser from him if the laud were unregistered.

33. Where a notice of liability to duty has been entered on the

register, it may be cancelled on production of any such evidence as is mentioned in the preceding rule.

Entry of No Survivorship of Joint Proprietors.

3-1. Where two or more persons apply to be entered as joint proprietors of land or of a charge, notice shall be given them that, by virtue of section 83 of the Act of 1875, as amended by the First Schedule of the Act of 1897, it is intended to make an entry in the register in Form 19 in the Schedule hereto.

35. If satisfactory evidence is produced to the Registrar that the proprietors are entitled to the land or charge for their own benefit, or that under the trust upon which they hold the land or charge a sole surviving trustee has power to dispose of the trust property, the entry shall not be made. If such evidence accompanies the application, the notice mentioned in the preceding Rule need not be

ven.

81

36. An entry in the said Form 19 may at any time be made at the request, or with the consent of, the joint propnetors.

37. When such an entry has been made, and the joint proprietors have been reducedto the number specified in it, the Registrar shall, before registering any disposition by the registered proprietor, require the production of the equitable titleto the operty, and may give such notices to the persons equitably entitled’: or any of them, as he may deem expedient. '

Notice of Deposit of Land Certificate.

38. Any person with whom a land certificate, office copy of a registered lease, or certificate of charge is deposited as security for money may, by writing, give notice to the Registrar of the fact, and on receipt of such notice the Registrar shall enter the same in the register.

39. So long as a notice of such a deposit is on the register, no new certificate shall be issued under section 8 (3) of the Act of 1897 without notice to the person with whom the deposit was made.

[graphic]

40. The notice of deposit may be removed on the written request, signed and verified, of the person who placed it on the register, or his successor in title; or, with his consent in writing, on the like request of the registered proprietor of the land; accompanied in each case by the land certificate.

Forms.

41. The forms in the Schedule hereto shall be adopted so far as practicable, but with such modifications as the parties may desire, and the Registrar approve.

[merged small][merged small][graphic]

THE SCHEDULE.
Form 1.

Restriction and Inhibition where Tenant for Life is registered as Proprietor, and there are Trustees of the Settlement, and powers of charging for special purposes.

Restriction.—-Until further order no transfer of the land is to be made except on sale or exchange, and the purchase moneys on sale are to be paid to A.B. of &c., and C.D. of &c. [the trustm of the settlement], or into court; no sale of the house and land shewn and edged red on the plan attached hereto is to be made without the consent of the said A.B. and C.D., or of the Court, and no charge is to be created without the consent of the said A.B. and C.D. (Or, where the tenant /or life has power to raise a definite sum for his own use, if and when the land has been charged to the extent of £ , no further charge shall be created without the consent of the said

A.B. and C.D.) [nhibitiI.m.-»On the death of E.F. of &c. [the rrgistererl proprietor] no entry is to be made until further order.

Form 2.

Restriction where the Tenant for Life is registered as Proprie_'0_r, and has incumbcred his beneficial interest, without reserving the '!'t_(]lIl to ezcercise his statutory powers.

Until further order no transfer or charge shall be registered without the consent of A. B. of &e. [the mortgagee of the life inte: est].

Form 3. Restriction where the Trustees of the Settlement are regiskrel as Proprietors. Until further order no transfer or charge is to be riiade without the consent of A B. of &c. [tenant /‘or life].

Form 4. Inhibition where there are no Trustees of the Settlement, and the Tenant for Life is registered as Proprietor. No transfer is to be made, and no charge is to be created, till further order. Form 5.

Inhibition where land is settled to such uses as Two Persons, entered as Proprietors, shall jointly appoint, and subject thereto in Settlement. After the death of either of the joint proprietors no transfer shall

be made or charge created till further order.

Form 6. Instrument of Transfer to give egfect to a settlement, under which the easisting Registered Proprietor is the Tenant for Life, but the Trustees of the Settlement are to be registered as Proprietors.

Lam) Rnersrar.
Land Transfer Acts, 1875 and 1897.
No. of title .

(Data) In pursuance of the provisions of the settlement dated &c., and made between &c. (or created by the will of &o.), under which I, A.B. of &c., am (or have the powers of) tenant for life under the Settled Land Acts, 1882 to 1890, and G.D. of &c. and E.F. of_&c., are the trustees for the purposes of the same Acts, I, the said A.B., hereby transfer to the said C.D. and E.F. all the land comprised in the title above referred to, and apply for the registration of the following restriction (fill in Form 3).

Form 7.

Instrument of Trans/‘er to give efiect to a Settlement under which the existing Registered Proprietor is the Tenant for Life, but the donees of

[graphic]

an overriding power of appointment vested in him and another are to

be registered as proprietors.

(Head and begin as in Form 6 down to “ under which ”) the land comprised in the title above referred to is limited to such uses as I, A. B. of &c., and C. D. of &c., shall jointly appoint, and subject thereto to various uses by virtue of which I am (or have the powers of) tenant for life under the Settled Land Acts, 1882 to 1890, I hereby transfer to myself and the said C. D. all the said land, and apply for the entry on the Register of the following inhibition (fill in Form 5).

Form 8.

Instrument of Transfer by the representative of a deceased settlor, transferring the land to the Tenant for Li/‘e or to the Trustees.

Head and begin as in Form 6 down to “ under which ”) A. B. of &c. is or has the powers of) tenant for life under the Settled Land Acts, 1882 to 1890, and C. D. of &c., and E. F. of &c., are the trustees for the purposes of the same Acts, I, G. H. of &c., with the consent of the said A. B. as tenant for life, hereby transfer to him (or to the said C. D. and E. F.) the land comprised in the title above referred to, and ap ly for the registration of the following restriction and inhibition ii/ill in Form 1 or 3, as the case may be).

Form 9. The like, where there is an overriding power of appointment.'

(Head and begin as in Form 6 down to “ under which”) the land comprised in the title above referred to is limited to such uses as A. B. of &c., and C. D. of &c., shall jointly appoint, and subject thereto to various uses, by virtue of which the sai A. B. is (or has the powers of) tenant for life under the Settled Land Acts, 1882 to 1890, I, E. F. of &c., with the consent of the said A. B. as tenant for life, hereby transfer to him and the said C. D. all the said land, and hereby apply for the entry on the Register of the following inhibition (fill in Form 5).

Form 10.

Instrument of Transfer where registered land is purchased with capital moneys liable to be laid out in the purchase of land to be settled to the uses of a Settlement, the Tenant for Life being registered as Proprietor.

(Heading as in Form 6.)

(Date) In consideration of £ paid out of capital moneys arising under a settlement (its. as in Form 6 down to " under wh.i(.'h ‘Q A. B. of &c. is (or has the powers of) tenant for life under the Settle Land Acts, 1882 to 1890, and C. D. of &c. and E. F. of &c. are the trustees for the purposes of the same Acts, I, G. H. of &c. [the vendor], with the consent of the said A. B., hereby transfer to him all the land comprised in the title above referred to, and we, the said C. D. and E. F. hereby apply for the registration of the following restriction and inhibition (fill in Form 1).

Form 11. The like—- Trustees being registered as Proprietors. (Heading as in Form 6.)

(Date) In consideration (&c. as in last form down to and including consent of A. B.) hereby transfer to the said C. D. and E. F. all the laud (&c. as in last form, substituting restrictionjas in Form 3).

Form 12.

The like, where there is an overriding power of appointment. (Heading as in Form 6.)

(Date) In consideration (&c., as in Form 10 down to “ iinder which ” and continue as in Form 9).

Form 13. _
Instrument of Charge by way of Annuity.
(Heading as in Form 6.)

(Date) I, A. B. of &c., hereby charge the land (a) comprised in the title above referred to with the payment to C. D. of &c., of an annuity of £ for years (or during his life, &c.) payable (half~ yearly, quarterly, &c.), on the of &c., in every year.

Nora.--If there is any consideration, it can be stated at the commencement, as :-—“ To secure £ part of the purchase money of the land comprised in the title above referred to ” or “ In consideration of an instrument of transfer of even date herewith of the land comprised in the title above referred to,” &c., &c.

(a) If only part of the land comprised in the title is charged, add here “ shown and edged with red in the accompanying plan, signed by me, being part of the land.”

[blocks in formation]

proprietor of a charge of equal or inferior priority prejadicially aflectzgg hereby apply to the Registrar to alter the terms of the charge da

of 18 , registered of 18 , against title No. . as follows :—

(Fill in proposed alteration.) NOTE.—The application will be signed by A. B., C. D., and E. F.

Form 15.

Assent to a devise of land under Sertion 3 of the Act of 1897. (Heading as in Form 6.)

(Date) I, A. B. of &c., as Executor of the late C. D. of &c., hereby assent to the devise contained in the Will of the said C. D. to E. F. of the land comprised in the title above referred to.

(To be signed by A. B. and verified.)

No'rE.—If the assent is to be subject to a charge for payment of money which the Executor is liable to pay, the form may be varied accordingly.

See also Note (a) to Form 13.

Form 16.

Appropriation of Land in satisfaction of a Legacy or share in Residuary Estate under Section -L of the Act of 1897.

Heading and commencement as in last Form down to “ hereby,” and then :——

With the consent of E. F. of &c., who is entitled to a legacy (or share in rssiduary estate) under the will of the said C. D., appropriate to the said E. F. the laud comprised in the title above referred to, and certify that all proper notices under the -itli section of the Land Transfer Act, 1897, have been given and the requirements of the rules of Court in respect of the matter duly complied with.

(To be signed by A. B. and E. F. and verified.)
See also Note (a) to Form 13.

Form 17.
Notice of Liability to Death Duty.

The land is liable to such death duties as may be payable or arise by reason of the death of A. B. of &c., who died on the of

, 18 , or by reason of a settlement created by deed dated, &c., or by reason of the determination of a lease dated, &c., or as the case may be. Form 18. Certificate of Non-Liability to Death Duty.

This is to certify that the land (or, if so, shcwn and edged with red on the accompanying plan marked , being part of the land) comprised in the title N o. , may be registered without notice of any liability to death duty by reason of the death of A. B. of &c., and that any such notice already registered may be cancelled.

[merged small][merged small][graphic][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small]

A Bill has been lodged for next Session, the preamble of which sets out that great difliculty is experienced by electric lighting companies in providing sufficient electrical energy to enable them to meet the demands of consumers at certain times of the day, whilst the production by each separate company of sufficient energy to meet the maximum demands involves the expenditure of largo sums of practically unproductive capital and results in the consequent enhancement of the price that has to paid for the electric light. To surmount these difficulties the Bill proposes to confer on one company power to erect generating stations on one central spotin Marylebone on the banks of the Regent’s Canal, and from this point to supply electrical energy in bulk to any “com any, body, or person,” at such price and on such terms as may be agreed}:

[graphic]
[graphic]
[merged small][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors]

This was an aplpeal from an order of the Court of Appeal (Lord Esher, liIR., Lopes an Rigby, L.JJ.), reported under the name of Flood v. Jae/non (43 W. R. 453 ; 1895, 2 Q. B. 21), afiirming the decision of Kennedy, J. The action was brought by two members of the Shipwrights’ Union against three members of the United Society of Boilermakers and Iron Ship Builders. The plaintiffs (the present respondents) alleged that the defendants maliciously and wrongfully, and with intent to injure the plaintiffs, procured and induced the Glengall Iron Co. to dismiss the plaintiffs from their employment, and not to engage or employ them in future. The respondents Flood and Taylor were workmen engaged by the day io do wood-work at the Glengall Iron Co.’s works, an were recognized as being men who had some time previously been doing ironwork in another yard. The boilermakers in the yard reported this, and finally Allen, the local delegate of their union and resent appellant, went to the managing director of the Glengall Iron 80. and stated, in effect, that, unless the respondents were discharged, all the members of the Boilermakers’ Union then being employed by the company would be called out and cease to work. The respondents were therefore discharged. At the trial of the action before Kennedy, J ., and a jury, the latter, in answer to certain questions, found that Allen maliciously induced the company to discharge the respondents, and also not to reengage them, and they gave £20 damages to each respondent. Upon further consideration the learned judge gave judgment for the respondents for £40 against Allen, and his judgment was sustained by the Court of Appeal. Thereupon Allen appealed to this House. The case was set down for re-argument and reheard in March last, when the judges were in attendance. The judges, having given their advice to the House some time back in answer to the question put to them, their lordships now gave Judgment, reversing the decision of the Court of Appeal. Lord Hansauar, 0., in the course of a long judgment, after stating the facts, said : The first objection made to the plaintiffs’ right to recover for the loss which they thus undoubtedly suffered is that no right of the plaintiffs was infringed, and that the right contended for on their behalf is not aright recognized by law, or at all events only such a right as everyone else is entitled to deprive them of if they stop short of physical violence or obstruction. I think the right to eméloy their labour as they will is a right both recognized by the law and su ciently guarded by its provisions to make any undue interference with that right an actiona le_wrong. Very early authorities in the law have recognized the right, and in my view no authority can be found which questions or qualifies it. The schoolmaster who complained that his scholars were being assaulted and brought an action; the quarry-owner who com lained that his servants were being menaced and molested, were bots: held to havea right of action. And it appears to me that the importance of those cases, and the principle established by them, has not been sufflciently considered. It issaid that threats of violence or of actual violence were unlawful means; the lawfulness of the means I will discuss hereafter. But the point on which these cases are important is the existence of the right. It was not the schoolmaster who was assaulted, it was not the quarry-owner who was assaulted or threatened; but, nevertheless, the schoolmaster was held entitled to bring an action in respect of the loss of scholars attending his school, and the quarry-owner in respect of the loss of workmen to his quarry. They were third persons; no violence or threats were applied to them, and the cause of action, which they had a right to insist on, was the indirect effect upon themselves by violence and threats applied to others. [And, after saying that the plaintiffs had a right to pursue their calling unmolested and referring to the history of the action upon the case, continued :1 It is said that the company were acting within their legal rights in discharging the plaintiffs. So they were, but does that affect the question of the responsibility of the person who caused them so to act by the means he used F The question must be whether what was done in fact, and what did in fact procure the dismissal of the plaintiff, was an actionable wrong or not. I have never heard that a man who was dismissed from his service by reason of some slander could not mainta1n_an action against the slanderer because the master had a legal right to discharge him. In treating this question I can desire no more apt exposition of the law than that which is contained in Bowen, L.J.’s, admirablyreasoned judgment in the 1l{o_quI case in the Court of Appeal. “ Intimidation, obstruction, and molestation are forbidden; so is the intentional procurement of a violation of individual rights, contractual or other, flssuming always that there is no just cause for it. The intentional driving away of customers by show of violence: Tarleton v. }il'Gawley (Peake N. P. C. 270) ; the obstruction of actors on the stage by preconficrted hissing: Clhford v. Brandon (2 Cam . 358), Gregory v. Brunswick (6 Man. & Gr. 205) ; the disturbance of wild Fowl in decoys by the firing of guns: Carrington v. Taylor (11 East 571) and Keeble v. Hickeringill (11 East 074 n.); the impeding or threatening servants or workmen: Garret v. T"yZv1' (Cro. Jac. 567); the inducing persons under personal contracts to break their contracts: Bowen v. Hall (29 W. R. 367, 6 Q. B. D. 333), Lumley v. Ggs (1 W. R. 432, 2 Ell. 8: Bl. 216), all are instances of such forbidden acts.” It will be observed that in what Bowen, L.J., says, if there be intimidation, obstruction, or molestation, or if there be intentional procurement of a violation of individual rights, contractual or other {always assuming that there is no just cause for it), are each of them, Where damage has been caused, actionable wrongs. And so Sir

[graphic]

Erle, in a passage quoted by the late Master of the Rolls (Lord Esher), points out that “ every person has a right under the law, as between himself and his fellow-subjects, to full freedom in disposing of his own labour or his own capital according to his own ivill. It follows that every other person is subject to the correlative duty arising therefrom, and is prohibited from any obstruction to the fullest exercise of this right which can be made compatible with the exercise of similar rights by others. Every act causing an obstruction to another in the exercise of the right comprised within this description, done, not in the exercise of the actor's own right, but for the purpose of obstruction, would, if damage should be caused thereby to the party obstructed, be a violation of this prohibition." The Lord Justice was too keen a reasoner not to observe that the words “ without just cause or excuse," which he had used, required exposition to render his reasoning complete, and accordingly he explains in another part of his judgment what his view was of malice. His lordship thus describes the state of mind which in his view would negative just cause or excuse: Mogul Steamship C0. v. 1l[’Gregor, Gow, §' U0. (37 W. R. 760, 23 Q. B. D. 613). . . . “Now, intentionally to do that which is calculated in the ordinary course of events to damage, and which does, in fact, damage another in that other person‘s property or trade, is actionable if done without just cause or excuse. [His lordship then considered several of the cases, particularly the Mogul case (40 \V. R. 337; 1892, A. C. 25) and Ifeeblwv. Hickerinyill (11 East 57-in), and after referring to several American cases, said :] I now revert to that part of the case which, 1 admit, has to be carefully considered-whether m what the defendant did in order to procure the dismissal of the plaintiffs he came within any of the rules which have been laid down in the cases quoted. Now, to my mind, he was guilty of intimidation and coercion from that intimidation-—though in using that phrase, “ of intimidation,” I am not using it in the technical sense which the statutes upon the subject have been construed to mean. I will explain in what sense I do understand the words, but in passing I must deprecate the language which has been used to minimize the effect of what Allen said. I observe it is described as “ inconvenience.” That is not how it is described by the witness. Edmonds, the foreman of the Glenga1lCo., thus described what would have been the effect upon the business of the firm. He said: “ They were rather busy just then with boilermakers; that they employed three times as many beilermakers as shipwrights; and if the boilermakers had knocked oif work or struck, it would have stopped the business of the company altogether-—entirsly —at that time, and that it was a very serious matter to the firm, and that the discharge of the men was in order to prevent their having to stop their business.” It seems to me very obvious to ask whether the threat to do that which will have such an effect as the witness described is a coercion of the will or not. The men wore good workmen and of good character; they were working, even according to Allen's own view, at their own trade as shipwrights, but they had worked upon a former occasion for a different employer upon an iron ship. And now it is important to call attention to the exact question which was left to the jury. Kennedy, J ., said : “ The question that I want you to answer is that, if you find he induced the Glengall Iran Co. by the threat which is suggested by the plaintiffs of calling out all the men on strike " (observe the phrase used, “the threat suggested by the glaintiifs of calling out all the men on strike,” and that that induced the lengall Iron Co. to discharge the plaintiffs, and yet it is to be said Allen's threat had nothing to do with the discharge of the plaintiffs), “ and he continued in that course of conduct if there was any attempt to employ them again, did he do that with the malicious intention which I have endeavoured to explain-that is merely, not for tho purpose of forwarding that which he believed to be his interest as adelegate of his union in the fair consideration of that interest, but for the purpose of injuring these plaintiffs and preventing them doing that which they were each of them entitled to do.” It appears to me that that is a direction of which the defendants cannot complain, since it puts what is to my mind an alternative more favourable to them. In my view his belief that what he was doing was for his interest as a delegate of his union would not justify the doing of what he did do. It is alleged.—and to my mind and to the mind of the jury proved-that the employers were compelled under pressure of the threats that he used to discharge the plaintiffs. The objection made by the defendants appears to be that the word " malicious ” adds nothing ; that if the thing was lawful it was lawful absolutely ; if it was not lawful it was unlawful—thc addition of the word “ malicious " can make no difierence. The fallacy appears to me to reside in the assumption that everything must be abso utely lawful or ab aolutcly unlawful. There are many things which may become lawful or unlawful according to circumstances. In s. decision of this House (Corporation of Bradford v. Pickles, 44 W. R. 190) it has undoubtedly been held that, whatever a man’s motives may be, he may dig into his own land and divert subterranean water which, but for his so treating his own land, might have reached his neighbour's land. But that is because the neighbour had no right to the flow of the subterranean water in that direction, and he had an absolute right to do what he would with his own property. But what analogy has such a case with the intentional inflicting of injury upon another person's property, reputation, or lawful occupation? To dig into one’s own land under the circumstances stated requires no cause or excuse. He may act from mere caprice, but his right on his own land is absolute so long as he does not interfere with the rights of others. Referring to Bowen, L.J.’s, observation —which, to my mind, is exactly accurate—-" in order to justify the intentional doing of that which is calculated, in the ordinary course of events, to damage, and which does in fact damage, another in that other person's property or trade,” you must have some just cause or excuse. N ow, the word. “malicious ” appears to me to negative just cause or excuse ; and, without attempting an exhaustive exposition of the word itself, it appears to me that, if I

« PreviousContinue »