Who Really Owns My Land
Discussion
Question for legal chappies or those that are well versed in British Contitutional matters, or indeed tyhose who have no idea but want to have their say 
I own my land/property freehold, someone on another debate board has claimed that all land in Britain is actually owned by the crown and can be taken back at anytime. i apprecaite that my land could be taken under a compulsory purchase order for road building, but find it hard to believe taht I do not really own my land.
I have searched for info on this and have found the following
[i]"Freehold" is a term used in real estate, meaning land held in fee simple, as opposed to leasehold, which is land which is leased; see also allodial
Fee simple is an estate in land in common law. It is the most common way real estate is owned in common law countries, and is ordinarily the most complete ownership interest that can be had in real property short of allodial title, which is often reserved for governments. Fee simple ownership represents absolute ownership of real property but it is limited by the four basic government powers of taxation, eminent domain, police power, and escheat and could also be limited by certain encumbrances or a condition in the deed.
And this
In English common law theory, the Crown has radical title or the allodium of all land in England, meaning that it is the ultimate "owner" of all land. However, the Crown can grant an abstract entity—called an estate in land—which is what is owned. The fee simple estate is also called "estate in fee simple" or "fee-simple title" and sometimes simply freehold in England and Wales. In the early Norman period, the holder of an estate in fee simple could not sell it, but instead could grant subordinate fee simple estates to third parties in the same parcel of land, a process known as "subinfeudation." The Statute of Quia Emptores adopted in 1290 abolished subinfeudation and instead allowed the sale of fee simple estates[/i]
from that I read that at one time all land was owned by the crown but that from 1290 freehod could be issued and so the land was owned by the purchaser.
Am I wrong ??
I own my land/property freehold, someone on another debate board has claimed that all land in Britain is actually owned by the crown and can be taken back at anytime. i apprecaite that my land could be taken under a compulsory purchase order for road building, but find it hard to believe taht I do not really own my land.
I have searched for info on this and have found the following
[i]"Freehold" is a term used in real estate, meaning land held in fee simple, as opposed to leasehold, which is land which is leased; see also allodial
Fee simple is an estate in land in common law. It is the most common way real estate is owned in common law countries, and is ordinarily the most complete ownership interest that can be had in real property short of allodial title, which is often reserved for governments. Fee simple ownership represents absolute ownership of real property but it is limited by the four basic government powers of taxation, eminent domain, police power, and escheat and could also be limited by certain encumbrances or a condition in the deed.
And this
In English common law theory, the Crown has radical title or the allodium of all land in England, meaning that it is the ultimate "owner" of all land. However, the Crown can grant an abstract entity—called an estate in land—which is what is owned. The fee simple estate is also called "estate in fee simple" or "fee-simple title" and sometimes simply freehold in England and Wales. In the early Norman period, the holder of an estate in fee simple could not sell it, but instead could grant subordinate fee simple estates to third parties in the same parcel of land, a process known as "subinfeudation." The Statute of Quia Emptores adopted in 1290 abolished subinfeudation and instead allowed the sale of fee simple estates[/i]
from that I read that at one time all land was owned by the crown but that from 1290 freehod could be issued and so the land was owned by the purchaser.
Am I wrong ??
I think that's correct. As I understand it, the Crown is the only absolute owner of land in England and Wales. Hence, when you buy land/property what you are really buying is the title, not the land. This is also why ownership is ultimately determined by the land registry and not simply based on a sales contract.
Corpulent Tosser said:
So the ownership is determined by the land registry, but does that mean I own my land or does the crown own it ?
You own it unless the government wants it for anything in which case all they have to do is give you what they think it's worth, so it really depends on what your definition of ownership is.falcemob said:
The queen sold the land our house is built on to my dad in 1967 so how can she still own it?
No because the Queen is not "The Crown". The Crown is the representation of the rulership of a sovereign country but is separate from the person who is the actual Crowned ruler. She only owns what her family have bought, her land and estates like Balmoral and Sandringham. Your land is still owned by the government that's why you will always pay taxes on it.I think you own the right to use it (ie th title to it)
if you owned it absolutely then no one else (including government) could exert any powers over it. However you must ask planning permission, you are subject to compulsoy purchase, you are governed by the state with regard to law and taxes, etc, etc
Therefore you dont own it but own the right to use the land and you have the right to sell these rights
if you owned it absolutely then no one else (including government) could exert any powers over it. However you must ask planning permission, you are subject to compulsoy purchase, you are governed by the state with regard to law and taxes, etc, etc
Therefore you dont own it but own the right to use the land and you have the right to sell these rights
Fresh out of finishing my land law module, I'm pretty confident in saying that comments about this being an urban myth are not true and the Queen selling land is also not true. At most the Queen will have sold the estate in land, not the land itself. You can never own land totally like you own your car for example.
Essentially all land is owned by the Crown, what everybody else holds is something known as an estate in the land, or a bundle of rights over that piece of land. The highest right you can have is a fee simple absolute in possession, which is more commonly known as freehold.
Things like planning permission aren't in place due to you not actually owning the land. They are there to balance the competing rights of adjacent land owners. eg. by exercising your right over your land you may totally ruin somebody elses if you block all their light etc.
Anyway, that aside, freehold land passes down to your heirs, and this can mean going to your brothers etc as well as your kids, however if you have no more heirs then it will revert back to the Crown- this reflects where true ownership lies.
But don't worry, in practical terms you may as well own it, but legally there is a distinction.
Essentially all land is owned by the Crown, what everybody else holds is something known as an estate in the land, or a bundle of rights over that piece of land. The highest right you can have is a fee simple absolute in possession, which is more commonly known as freehold.
Things like planning permission aren't in place due to you not actually owning the land. They are there to balance the competing rights of adjacent land owners. eg. by exercising your right over your land you may totally ruin somebody elses if you block all their light etc.
Anyway, that aside, freehold land passes down to your heirs, and this can mean going to your brothers etc as well as your kids, however if you have no more heirs then it will revert back to the Crown- this reflects where true ownership lies.
But don't worry, in practical terms you may as well own it, but legally there is a distinction.
Gassing Station | The Pie & Piston Archive | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff