Registered land allows for certainty about pieces of land and also efficiency when it comes to transferring land between people. It is the most effective way of protecting rights in relation to a piece of land.

The basic rule from s. 28(1) of the Land Registration Act 2002 works on the basis of first come, first serve but this is based on the idea of e-conveyancing. Until that time the special priority rule focuses on what is actually on the register. This can include charges such as positive and restrictive covenants as well as financial charges like mortgages. It also includes notices in the register that is the main focus of the lecture.

Whether they are permanent or temporary, minor interests can generally be protected by the entrance of a notice on the register. The can include certain leases, contracts and even mortgages and charges that are equitable. This also covers the statutory rights of spouses and civil partners in the Family Law Act 1996.

Some things cannot go into the register such as short-term leases, beneficial interests under a trust of land and restrictive covenants between a lessor and lessee.

While anyone can apply to have a notice put in the register this does not necessarily make it valid. In fact while many non-controversial notices can be agree with the owner there are also unilateral notices that can be entered where there is a dispute although the owner can apply to have these removed.

Any minor interest not in the register that could have been registered is liable to be postponed upon a sale of the land. This can operate harshly but preserves the integrity of the register ensuring it reflects reality.

Where the registered land system is used to commit fraud the courts will step in. This is most common where a person is aware of an unregistered interest but acts so as to negate it such as in Buttigeig v Micallef (1998) and Loke Yew v Port Sweetenham Rubber Co. Ltd [1913]. If a purchaser’s conscience has been touched either by positive affirmation or the surrounding context this may also establish a constructive trust; Ashburn Anstalt v Arnold [1989].