Held Building society has a legal unregistered interest Not guilty of postponing conduct, because the document was “in escrow” Bullock knew Solicitor worked for the Building Society, and handed over the receipt, thus guilty of postponing conduct Thus, Building Society (s 43A legal, no postponing) Lloyds (equitable) Bullock (equity, postponing) Execution of a dealing which does not truly reflect the transaction, such as the execution of a transfer by a registered proprietor, who has mortgaged but not sold a property (Holding out) Breskvar v Wall Breskvar was the proprietor Borrowed money from Mr. Petrie Convinced them to sign a blank transfer as security for the loan Write in his son, Wall, into the spot Onsold to Alban Before Alban registration, Breskvars sued Held The fraud of the grandfather was imputed on the grandson So Breskvar and Alban had priority over Wall. What of the Breskvar (equitable) and Alban (equitable) dispute? The Breskvars were earlier, so would have won But, they were postponed because they held out that they had sold And, Alban, not unreasonable, assumed this was the true position Paid bona fide value Without notice appellants armed the second respondent with the means of placing “The himself on the register” executed transfer and CT, authorized Petrie to use if nevessary
Held Building society has a legal unregistered interest Not guilty of postponing conduct, because the document was “in escrow” Bullock knew Solicitor worked for the Building Society, and handed over the receipt, thus guilty of postponing conduct Thus, Building Society (s 43A legal, no postponing) Lloyds (equitable) Bullock (equity, postponing) Execution of a dealing which does not truly reflect the transaction, such as the execution of a transfer by a registered proprietor, who has mortgaged but not sold a property (Holding out) Breskvar v Wall Breskvar was the proprietor Borrowed money from Mr. Petrie Convinced them to sign a blank transfer as security for the loan Write in his son, Wall, into the spot Onsold to Alban Before Alban registration, Breskvars sued Held The fraud of the grandfather was imputed on the grandson So Breskvar and Alban had priority over Wall. What of the Breskvar (equitable) and Alban (equitable) dispute? The Breskvars were earlier, so would have won But, they were postponed because they held out that they had sold And, Alban, not unreasonable, assumed this was the true position Paid bona fide value Without notice “The appellants armed the second respondent with the means of placing himself on the register” executed transfer and CT, authorized Petrie to use if nevessary
real-property-notes.docx