REF/2014/0803

 

PROPERTY CHAMBER, LAND REGISTRATION DIVISION

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL

 

 

IN THE MATTER OF A REFERENCE FROM HM LAND REGISTRY

 

 

BETWEEN

PURPOSE PROPERTIES LIMITED

 

APPLICANT

 

and

 

JAMES OLIVIER

 

RESPONDENT

 

Property Address: Glen Gors Estate, Harlech

Title Number: CYM21570

 

Before: Judge Michell

 

Sitting at: Liverpool Civil Justice Centre

On: 24^th July 2015

 

 

Applicant Representation:Mr Forman, solicitor of MSB Solicitors

Respondent Representation: In person

 

___________________________________________________________________________­

 

ORDER

___________________________________________________________________________

 

UPON HEARING the solicitor for the Applicant and the Respondent in person

 

The Tribunal orders as follows:

 

1.         The Respondent be debarred from taking further part in the proceedings.

 

2.         The Chief Land Registrar do give effect to the application of the Applicant, Purpose         Properties Limited dated 21^st March 2014 to cancel the restriction registered by the    Respondent on 5^th June 2006 as if the objection of the Respondent thereto had not       been made.

 

3.         The Respondent do pay the Applicant’s costs of today and the costs incurred from the      date of referral of the matter to the Tribunal (being 24^th October 2014) until 15^th April        2015 to be assessed.   

 

4.         The Applicant do serve on the Tribunal and on the Respondent a detailed schedule of       costs to be assessed by 5pm on 7^th August 2015.

 

5.         The Respondent do serve on the Tribunal and on the Applicant his Points of Objection      to the schedule of costs by 5pm on 21^st August 2015.

 

6.         The Applicant do serve on the Tribunal and on the Respondent his Points of Reply (if       so advised) to the Points of Objection by 5pm on 4^th September 2015.

 

 

 

REASONS

 

1.         By a Form RX1 dated 1^st June 2006 the Respondent, Mr Olivier by his then solicitors, applied to register a restriction on the title CYM21570, being the registered title to property known as Glan Gors Estate, Harlech.  Lodged with the application was a letter described in box 6 of the Form as “(1) copy letter Purpose Properties Limited dated 24^th May 2006”.  In box 9, headed “Entitlement to apply for a restriction”, an “x” was placed in the box alongside the words “The consent of the registered proprietor of the registered estate/charge referred to in panel 4 accompanies this application or the applicant’s conveyancer certifies that he holds this consent”.  In box 11 headed “Evidence of consent”, an “x” was placed in the box alongside the words “The consent referred to in panel 9 is contained on page 1 of the document numbered 1 referred to in panel 6”.    

 

2.         The letter accompanying the application and referred to in box 6 was a letter on notepaper headed “Purpose Properties Limited” bearing the date 24^th May 2006 and headed “Glen Gors Estate, Harlech”.  The body of the letter reads as follows

            “I have been contacted by Mr James Olivier regards to the above property which is            owned by my company, Purpose Properties.

            I would like you to know these things:

            A.        I do not know of any impending sale, nor have I been contacted regards to any      sale, nor have I given any permission for any sale.

            B.        I can confirm that 25% of the land is owned by James Olivier, which is in turn       held in beneficiary trust by David Chand, who uses an offshore company called    Lambridge who have changed their name to Dominion.

            C.        I would agree with Mr Olivier that a notice should be put on the register as a          matter of urgency to suspend any sale while I give my permission after consultation with all of the shareholders including Mr Olivier.

            Your response would be appreciated.”

Below these words appeared a manuscript signature and under the signature was printed the name “Stephen Roskell” and underneath that, the word “Director”.

 

3.         The restriction was registered on 5^th June 2006.

 

4.         By application in Form RX3 dated 21^st March 2014 the Applicant, Purpose Properties Limited applied for cancellation of the restriction.  The Applicant claimed that the consent of the company for the entry of the restriction had been fabricated.  The application was accompanied by a witness statement of Mr Stephen Roskell dated 24^th March 2011.  In that witness statement, Mr Roskell said that he had been a director of Purpose Properties Limited from 6^th February 1997 until 5^th December 2006; that he did not make any agreement with Mr Olivier that a notice could be entered on the Land Registry title; and that Purpose Properties Limited had given no consent to Mr Olivier to place a restriction on the title.

 

5.         Mr Olivier objected to the application to cancel the restriction.  His grounds of objection were set out in an email to HM Land Registry sent on 1^st May 2014.  In that email, he said

            “Mr Roskell did sign these letters but, no doubt, on the instruction of Mr Chand, he          has had to say he didn’t, if Mr Chand is saying I signed them, when why? I was a      director of Purpose Properties, why didn’t I just sign them myself?”.

 

6.         The matter was referred to the Tribunal on 24^th October 2014.  The parties served statements of case pursuant to the directions of the Tribunal.  There was then an exchange of email correspondence between the Applicant’s solicitors and Mr Olivier concerning agreeing who to instruct to give expert handwriting evidence.  On 15^th April 2015 Mr Olivier sent an email to the Applicant’s solicitors stating

            “I don’t see the need for a handwriting expert as I am prepared to acknowledge that I       signed Steve Roskell’s name, is your client prepared to do the same and also admit to     signing in the aliases of David Ekin and Mr Bajaj?”.   

 

7.         At the hearing, Mr Olivier stated clearly to me that he signed the name of “Stephen Roskell” on the letter dated 24^th April 2006 that was sent to HM Land Registry together with the application for entry of the restriction as evidence of the consent of the Applicant to the entry of the restriction.  He also stated clearly that he signed the letter in Mr Roskell’s name intending HM Land Registry to believe that the letter had been signed by a director of the Applicant other than himself. 

 

8.         The restriction was obtained by a clear misrepresentation to HM Land Registry that Mr Stephen Roskell, being a director of the Applicant, had signed the letter dated 24^th May 2006 and had thereby confirmed that the Applicant consented to the entry of the restriction.  Had the letter not been sent, the restriction would not have been entered as if by consent and without notice of the application having been given to the Applicant. In those circumstances, I consider that there is no reasonable prospect of the Respondent’s objection to the application succeeding and he should be barred from taking further part in the proceedings and that I should go on to direct that the restriction should be cancelled.

 

9.         Mr Olivier must pay the Applicant’s costs of the proceedings.  However, as he indicated on 15^th April 2015 that he admitted signing Mr Roskell’s name on the letter, the Applicant could and should have made an application under Rule 9(7) to bar him from taking further part in the proceedings and for summary judgment.  Therefore, I consider that it is just that Mr Olivier pay the costs up to the 15^th April 2015 and the costs of the hearing (including the costs of the Applicant’s solicitor’s immediate preparation for the hearing) but not the costs incurred between the 15^th April 2015 and the hearing.

 

 

BY ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL

 

 

 

DATED THIS 24^th July 2015