UTLC LC-2022-000705 - [2023] UKUT 141 (LC)

Fecha: 01-Ene-2023

Conclusions

The outcome of the Appeal

178.

Although I have upheld substantial parts of the Decision, it follows from my decision on Ground 4 that I am unable to uphold the conclusions of the Judge at Paragraphs 7.1.6 and 7.1.7. Those conclusions were in the following terms:

“7 .1.6. In order to be required to cancel the restriction the Chief Land Registrar must be satisfied that it is no longer required.
7 .1. 7. The restriction is still required because the Applicant has refused to comply with its obligation pursuant to clause 3.2 to make the payment due under the Payment Agreement.”

179.

The Respondent is, by reference to my decision on Ground 4, subject to an obligation to assist the Appellant in the removal of the Restriction pursuant to Clause 6.4. As such, it seems to me that it is impossible to say that the Restriction is still required, within the meaning of Rule 97.2 of the Land Registration Rules 2003. It seems to me that the Chief Land Registrar can be satisfied that the Restriction is no longer required, within the meaning of Rule 97.3.

180.

I therefore conclude that paragraph 1 of the Order, by which the Judge directed the Chief Land Registrar to cancel the Application, falls to be set aside, together with the conclusions of the Judge in the Decision, at Paragraphs 7.1.6 and 7.1.7. For the reasons which I have given, it seems to me that paragraph 1 of the Order and the conclusions at Paragraphs 7.1.6 and 7.1.7 are based upon errors on points of law, and cannot stand. For the sake of completeness it also seems to me that the Judge’s conclusion at Paragraph 7.1.5, on Section 44(5), falls to be set aside as being based on an error of law, although this conclusion was strictly obiter to the Judge’s reasoning on the question of whether the Appellant was bound by the Payment Agreement.

181.

It seems to me that it is not necessary to remit the case to the Judge. Given my own reasoning in this decision, I am able to remake the relevant parts of the Decision as a decision that the Restriction is no longer required, and should be removed from the Registered Title.

182.

Accordingly, I will make an order allowing the Appeal, in part, setting aside paragraph 1 of the Order, and directing the Chief Land Registrar to cancel the Restriction pursuant to the Application.

Mr Justice Edwin Johnson

President

10^th July 2023

Right of appeal

Any party has a right of appeal to the Court of Appeal on any point of law arising from this decision. The right of appeal may be exercised only with permission. An application for permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal must be sent or delivered to the Tribunal so that it is received within 1 month after the date on which this decision is sent to the parties (unless an application for costs is made within 14 days of the decision being sent to the parties, in which case an application for permission to appeal must be made within 1 month of the date on which the Tribunal’s decision on costs is sent to the parties). An application for permission to appeal must identify the decision of the Tribunal to which it relates, identify the alleged error or errors of law in the decision, and state the result the party making the application is seeking. If the Tribunal refuses permission to appeal a further application may then be made to the Court of Appeal for permission.