Persian Properties v Registrar of Titles

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: Ms. Justice Carroll
• Judgment Date: 14 February 2001
• Neutral Citation: 2001 WJSC-HC 5537
• Court: High Court
• Date: 14 February 2001

2001 WJSC-HC 5537

THE HIGH COURT

Carroll

PERSIAN PROPERTIES LTD v. REGISTRAR OF TITLES & ANOR

LAND REGISTRY

IN THE MATTER OF THE REGISTRATION OF TITLE ACT, 1964 SECTIONS 19

AND 120

AND IN THE MATTER OF Folio 77887F THE REGISTER OF FREE HOLDERS

AND IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION FOR COMPENSATION BY PERSIAN PROPERTIES LIMITED

BETWEEN

PERSIAN PROPERTIES LIMITED

APPELLANT

AND

REGISTRAR OF TITLES AND MINISTER FOR FINANCE

RESPONDENTS

Citations

LAND REGISTRY RULES 1972 RULE 19 SI 230/1972

REGISTRATION OF TITLE ACT 1964 S85

REGISTRATION OF TITLE ACT 1964 S120(1)(b)

REGISTRATION OF TITLE ACT 1964 S120(2)

BOYLE V CONNAUGHTON UNREP LAFFOY 21.3.2000

SERRIDGE, IN RE 1926 IR 169

REGISTRATION OF TITLE ACT 1964 S120

REGISTRATION OF TITLE ACT 1964 S120(5)

GLOVER ON REGISTRATION OF OWNERSHIP 1933 25

MCALLISTER ON REGISTRATION OF TITLE 1973 59

REGISTRATION OF TITLE ACT 1964 S72

Synopsis:

Property

Land; registration of title; damages; dispute regarding title to a bottleneck entrance between two properties; property in the entrance destroyed; map submitted with application for first registration of one property inaccurately portrayed its breadth; bottleneck eliminated on the Folio map registered with the Land Registry; whether the discrepancies would have been obvious on an examination of the two maps; whether error had been substantial or within acceptable margin of error in mapping practice; whether plaintiffs were aware before signing of the dispute as to title; whether plaintiffs entitled to compensation for the diminution in value of their freehold interest by reason of the loss of part of the entrance; whether the value of such loss is limited to the value of that land; whether the loss is entirely attributable to the error of the Land Registry; Registration of Title Act, 1964;

Held: Plaintiffs awarded £10,000 and the High Court costs.

Persian Properties Ltd. v. Registrar of Titles - High Court: Carroll J. - 14/02/2001

The proceedings concerned a dispute over an error which had occurred in a Land Registry Map. The plaintiff sought damages in relation to the error. Carroll J held that the Land Registry were at fault for the error in question and awarded £10,000 in damages.

1 Ms. Justice Carroll delivered the 14th day of February 2001.

2 The Commissioners of Public Works acquired the leasehold interest in number 3 Merrion Square, Dublin under lease dated 28th March, 1931 from the Pembroke Estate for 89 years from 25th March, 1940 at £65 per annum. The lease comprised, firstly, the house at number 3 Merrion Square and gardens (dimensions given) edged red on the map and, secondly, "the plot of ground running from Merrion Street Lower to the rear of the premises firstly above demised as shown on the said plan and thereon edged in blue subject as to the lastly mentioned premises to all existing rights and easements affecting the same".

3 The map very clearly shows that there is a bottle neck entrance from lower Merrion Street between the rear of No 1 Merrion Square and the side of Merrion Hall (now the Davenport Hotel)

4 The Commissioners acquired the fee simple from Pembroke Estate by conveyance dated the 25th April, 1975. The fee simple was conveyed by reference to the premises comprised in the lease. On behalf of the Commissioners of Public Works the Chief State Solicitor applied for first registration on 3rd February, 1976 identifying the property comprised in the conveyance as outlined in red and blue on the map lodged therewith. The application stated the purchase money of the property did not exceed £20,000

5 The map lodged with the application was inaccurate. According to the lease map the bottle neck was created by a strip at the rear of number 1 Merrion Square measuring 22 feet 2" long x 5 feet 3"in width with a corresponding strip on the Merrion Hall side. After 22 feet approximately the lane widened out to 15 feet. The map lodged by the Chief State Solicitor reduced the strip at the rear of number 1 Merrion Square by about 3 feet but showed the full width of the strip on the Merrion Hall side. The Land Registry in preparing the Folio map eliminated the bottle neck entirely on both sides showing a passage approximately 15 feet wide leading from Lower Merrion Street. The title was registered on Folio 8708F, County Dublin.

6 The Commissioners also acquired number 2 Merrion Square and their freehold title was registered on Folio 62220F, County Dublin. The Commissioners transferred both Folios 8708F and 62220F to MJB Developments Limited on the 16th September, 1988 which transferred to Foleyhurst Limited on the 11th January, 1989, Foleyhurst Limited transferred part of Folio 8708F (subsequently registered in a new Folio 77887F) as well as the entire of Folio 62220F to Minoa Limited. Minoa Limited got planning permission for the erection of three town houses and two apartments at the rear of numbers 2 & 3 Merrion Square.

7 Persian Properties Limited ("Persian Properties") acquired Merrion Hall and then the plot retained by Foleyhurst Limited out of Folio 8708F with the intention of building the Davenport Hotel. On the 5th February, 1992 Persian Properties signed a contract for sale with Minoa Limited for Folio 77887F and 62220F. The sale was closed on 7th May, 1992 and the Deed of Transfer is dated 2nd July, 1992.

8 The position on the ground when Persian Properties bought the laneway was that the leasehold interest in No 1 Merrion Square situate at the corner of Merrion Square and Merrion Street Lower was owned by Tompkin Estates Limited (Tompkin Estates) under reversionary lease from the Pembroke Estate dated 1st March, 1955. The premises existing at the side and rear at the date of the lease to Tompkin Estates had been knocked down and the Morrissey building had been erected. The Morrissey gable wall had been built approximately 5 feet inside the leasehold boundary. A screen wall extending approximately 5 feet at right angles to the gable wall with a pedestrian entrance in it existed a short distance in from the corner. Substantial gates which were closed at night closed off the rest of the laneway. Behind the screen wall the laneway was 15 feet wide. The existence of the screen wall and pedestrian entrance is shown in the map relevant to the town houses planning permission. There is also an old photograph showing them.

9 The builder for the Davenport Hotel, Mr. Maguire, knocked the screen wall and arch on the 8th May, 1992 and a crane was moved in immediately.

10 By letter dated the 15th May, 1992 to Noel O'Callaghan, Tompkin Estates the owner of the leasehold interest in number 1 Merrion Square and the property at the rear in lower Merrion Street claimed to be entitled to part of the laneway. Sometime later Tompkin Estates acquired the fee simple interest in their leasehold premises. Tompkin Estates then initiated High Court proceedings claiming title to the disputed plot, 22 feet 2"x 5 feet 3". McCraken J. by judgment dated the 16th of March, 1995 upheld the title of Tompkin Estates to the disputed plot. An appeal to the Supreme Court by Persian Properties was withdrawn on the 18th November, 1997

11 Persian Properties then bought a claim for compensation under Section 120 of the Registration of Title Act, 1964.This was heard by the Registrar on the 15th April, 1999 and by adjudication and order dated the 26th July, 1999 she refused the application. When the matter came on appeal to the High Court the relevant correspondence was put in evidence and oral evidence was given.

12 In the correspondence, Messrs. Montgomery & Chaytor, Solicitors for Tompkin Estates wrote to Mr. Noel O'Callaghan the owner of the Montclare Hotel and the moving force behind the Davenport Hotel on 15th May, 1992 enclosing a copy of the plan endorsed on their lease showing the boundaries, including the disputed plot, and complaining about the demolition of the gateway and obstruction of the use of the laneway.

13 Mr O'Callaghan replied on 18th May, 1992 saying he had instructed an architect to let them have proposals relating to reinstatement of the laneway within a week to ten days or alternatively their architects could make direct contact.

14 Messrs. Montgomery & Chayter wrote again on 9th June, 1992 saying no proposals had been received and objecting to scaffolding being affixed to the northern wall of their client's building without permission. They called on Mr. O'Callaghan to restore the wall and gateway, remove the scaffolding and repair any damage, failing which they would seek an injunction.

15 Messrs. Kellys, Solicitors for Persian Properties and Mr. O'Callaghan replied on 15th June, 1992 to say that the scaffolding was remedied. In relation to the screen wall they accepted that portion of this was damaged while a crane was being moved on site. They confirmed they had instructed the builder to immediately replace the screen wall and work would commence that afternoon. They finished by saying any application for an injunction which would result in interruption or delay in carrying out building works would have most serious consequences for their client and would involve their client in substantial loss. They stated there was no necessity to seek any injunction and asked that if they did, to make the High Court aware so they could be present in Court and file a replying Affidavit.

16 Messrs. Montgomery & Chaytor replied on 30th June saying they were seeking confirmation from their clients about the scaffolding and reminding them the screen wall had not been dealt with.

17 Messrs. Montgomery & Chaytor again wrote on the 12th October, 1992. Among their complaints was that the screen wall was demolished without warning, that the footpath private to their client had been squashed into the ground by site traffic and that scaffolding was standing on the private footpath. They required a date by which the contractor would vacate...