Background to acquisition
● ‘For very many people their first and closest contact with the law is when they
come to buy or sell a house. They frequently find it a profoundly depressing and
frustrating experience. The vendor puts his house on the market. He receives an
offer which is probably less than his asking price. He agonises over whether to
accept or hold out for more. He decides to accept, perhaps after negotiating
some increase. A deal is struck. Hands are shaken. The vendor celebrates,
relaxes, makes plans for his own move and takes his house off the market. Then
he hears that the purchaser who was formerly pleading with him to accept his
offer has decided not to proceed. No explanation is given, no apology made. The
vendor has to embark on the whole dreary process of putting his house on the
market all over again.
● For the purchaser the process is, if anything, worse. After a series of futile visits
to unsuitable houses he eventually finds the house of his dreams. He makes an
offer, perhaps at the asking price, perhaps at what the agent tells him the vendor
is likely to accept. The offer is accepted. A deal is done. The purchaser instructs
solicitors to act. He perhaps commissions an architect to plan alterations. He
makes arrangements to borrow money. He puts his own house on the market.
He makes arrangements to move. He then learns that the vendor has decided to
sell to someone else, perhaps for the price already offered and accepted,
perhaps for an increased price achieved by a covert, unofficial auction. Again, no
explanation, no apology. The vendor is able to indulge his self-interest, even his
whims, without exposing himself to any legal penalty.’ Pitt v PHH Asset
Management Ltd [1994] 1 WLR 327, 333.
Terminology
● Under s 205 LPA 1925, a conveyance is defined as ‘a mortgage, charge,
lease, assent, vesting declaration, vesting instrument, disclaimer, release and
every other assurance of property or of an interest therein by any instrument,
except a will…’
● The same section defines a disposition as including ‘a conveyance and also a
devise, bequest, or an appointment of property contained in a will.’
● Conveyance is when title of estate is transferred from one person to another
● A will is a legal document that sets out a person's wishes on how their property
including land would be distributed after their death
, ● A deposition- a document that transfers ownership of title to an estate in land
● So, a conveyance is when a title or interest is transferred from one person to
another. This comes under the broader term of disposition, which also includes
a will.
● Testater- person making the will
● Note- if the criteria for deed is satisfied, then the conveyance is valued as a deed
Formalities
● To understand the acquisition process, we first need to understand what is meant
by formalities.
● Formalities are certain rules stipulated by law. If formalities have not been
satisfied, the transaction has not occurred or may only operate in equity.
● They are certain rules you have to follow when making a conveyance or transfer
of land
● The textbook nicely sets out the reasons for formalities. The quotes from
Critchley and Birks are useful:
❖ ‘One good starting point might be the common legal distinction between
matters of ‘substance’ and ‘form’. This suggests a definition of formality as
something which is external or added to the transaction, rather than a
constituent, substantive part of it. In legal usage, formality is generally also
seen as a requirement, rather than a mere habit or convention, so it would
be helpful for our definition to express the notion that formality is
something mandatory. Further, it is typical (though not essential), where a
legal formality is imposed, to have some sort of sanction for breach of the
rule: some legal disbenefit, or some failure to obtain a legal benefit.’
Patricia Critchley, ‘Taking Formalities Seriously’ in Susan Bright and
John Dewar (eds, Land Law: Themes and Perspectives (Oxford
University Press 1998) 508
● ‘There is an extra reason [for formality requirements] too. It derives from the
invisibility of real rights. Just as one cannot see a fee simple, so one cannot see
an easement or a restrictive covenant… Real rights have to be made apparent
through documents. Acquiring land would otherwise be a nightmare unless the
law made really massive erosions of the principle of nemo dat.’ Peter Birks,
‘Before We Begin: Five Keys to Land Law in Susan Bright and John Dewar
● ‘For very many people their first and closest contact with the law is when they
come to buy or sell a house. They frequently find it a profoundly depressing and
frustrating experience. The vendor puts his house on the market. He receives an
offer which is probably less than his asking price. He agonises over whether to
accept or hold out for more. He decides to accept, perhaps after negotiating
some increase. A deal is struck. Hands are shaken. The vendor celebrates,
relaxes, makes plans for his own move and takes his house off the market. Then
he hears that the purchaser who was formerly pleading with him to accept his
offer has decided not to proceed. No explanation is given, no apology made. The
vendor has to embark on the whole dreary process of putting his house on the
market all over again.
● For the purchaser the process is, if anything, worse. After a series of futile visits
to unsuitable houses he eventually finds the house of his dreams. He makes an
offer, perhaps at the asking price, perhaps at what the agent tells him the vendor
is likely to accept. The offer is accepted. A deal is done. The purchaser instructs
solicitors to act. He perhaps commissions an architect to plan alterations. He
makes arrangements to borrow money. He puts his own house on the market.
He makes arrangements to move. He then learns that the vendor has decided to
sell to someone else, perhaps for the price already offered and accepted,
perhaps for an increased price achieved by a covert, unofficial auction. Again, no
explanation, no apology. The vendor is able to indulge his self-interest, even his
whims, without exposing himself to any legal penalty.’ Pitt v PHH Asset
Management Ltd [1994] 1 WLR 327, 333.
Terminology
● Under s 205 LPA 1925, a conveyance is defined as ‘a mortgage, charge,
lease, assent, vesting declaration, vesting instrument, disclaimer, release and
every other assurance of property or of an interest therein by any instrument,
except a will…’
● The same section defines a disposition as including ‘a conveyance and also a
devise, bequest, or an appointment of property contained in a will.’
● Conveyance is when title of estate is transferred from one person to another
● A will is a legal document that sets out a person's wishes on how their property
including land would be distributed after their death
, ● A deposition- a document that transfers ownership of title to an estate in land
● So, a conveyance is when a title or interest is transferred from one person to
another. This comes under the broader term of disposition, which also includes
a will.
● Testater- person making the will
● Note- if the criteria for deed is satisfied, then the conveyance is valued as a deed
Formalities
● To understand the acquisition process, we first need to understand what is meant
by formalities.
● Formalities are certain rules stipulated by law. If formalities have not been
satisfied, the transaction has not occurred or may only operate in equity.
● They are certain rules you have to follow when making a conveyance or transfer
of land
● The textbook nicely sets out the reasons for formalities. The quotes from
Critchley and Birks are useful:
❖ ‘One good starting point might be the common legal distinction between
matters of ‘substance’ and ‘form’. This suggests a definition of formality as
something which is external or added to the transaction, rather than a
constituent, substantive part of it. In legal usage, formality is generally also
seen as a requirement, rather than a mere habit or convention, so it would
be helpful for our definition to express the notion that formality is
something mandatory. Further, it is typical (though not essential), where a
legal formality is imposed, to have some sort of sanction for breach of the
rule: some legal disbenefit, or some failure to obtain a legal benefit.’
Patricia Critchley, ‘Taking Formalities Seriously’ in Susan Bright and
John Dewar (eds, Land Law: Themes and Perspectives (Oxford
University Press 1998) 508
● ‘There is an extra reason [for formality requirements] too. It derives from the
invisibility of real rights. Just as one cannot see a fee simple, so one cannot see
an easement or a restrictive covenant… Real rights have to be made apparent
through documents. Acquiring land would otherwise be a nightmare unless the
law made really massive erosions of the principle of nemo dat.’ Peter Birks,
‘Before We Begin: Five Keys to Land Law in Susan Bright and John Dewar
