AIB Group (UK) PLC v Ross & Ors [2012] NIQB 59 (28 June 2012)

AIB Group (UK) PLC v Ross & Ors [2012] NIQB 59 (28 June 2012)

The registration of the charge was a mistake for the purposes of the Act due to the plaintiff's solicitors' failings, and the charge should not affect the title of the second defendant. The register should be rectified to substitute the intended transferee and vacate the charge.

Citation
[2012] NIQB 59
Parties
Plaintiff: Plaintiff; Defendant: First Defendant; Defendant: Second Defendant; Defendant: Third Defendant; Defendant: Fourth Defendant; Defendant: Fifth Defendant; Defendant: Sixth Defendant
Jurisdiction
Northern Ireland
Judgment Date
28 June 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment
Outcome
Plaintiff's claim for possession refused; judgment for the second, third, fourth, fifth, and sixth defendants; stay of proceedings against the first defendant; rectification of the register ordered in favour of the second defendant; charge in favour of plaintiff vacated.
Legal Topics
Rectification of Register, Fraud, Mistake, Mortgage/charge, Title to Land
Property Law Land Registration Rectification of Register Fraud Mistake Mortgage/charge Title to Land

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Plaintiff

Plaintiff

First Defendant

Defendant

Second Defendant

Defendant

Third Defendant

Defendant

Fourth Defendant

Defendant

Fifth Defendant

Defendant

Sixth Defendant

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the land register should be rectified to substitute the intended transferee and vacate the charge in favour of the plaintiff
  2. 2 Whether the registration of the charge was a 'mistake' under the relevant legislation
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff's claim for possession should be granted

Ratio Decidendi

The registration of the charge was a mistake for the purposes of the Act due to the plaintiff's solicitors' failings, and the charge should not affect the title of the second defendant. The register should be rectified to substitute the intended transferee and vacate the charge.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's claim for possession refused; judgment for the second, third, fourth, fifth, and sixth defendants; stay of proceedings against the first defendant; rectification of the register ordered in favour of the second defendant; charge in favour of plaintiff vacated.

Orders

  • Declaration that the second defendant is entitled to full and unencumbered legal and equitable title to Castlewood.
  • Rectification of the register to confirm title to Castlewood in the name of the second defendant.