This essay will deal with the 4 issues concerning whether Greg is bound by the interests on Willow Cottage (WC). To establish this, it is necessary to satisfy a 3-criteria process that will be followed for each issue that arises.
In part A, the issue is whether the contract is binding on WC. To establish this it must be identified what makes a valid contract and If they are legally enforceable.
Section 2 of the Law of Property (Miscellaneous provisions) Act sets out that a contract for the sale of land must be in writing containing all the terms agreed and signed by both parties to be valid. If a valid contract is created, and a vendor refuses to transfer legal ownership then this would constitute a breach of contract, with a remedy of damages or specific performance.
…show more content…
This is because contracts do not fall within in Section 1 of the Law of Property Act, a deed would be needed to take effect in law. Subsequently contracts are not required to be registered on the register and do not override but, can be protected by being registered as notice.
The facts suggest that Abduls contracts is valid. If it does comply with section 2 then Abdul can claim for a breach of contract or it will be void. However, validity of the contract is not an essential point here because Abdul’s interest only exists in equity as contract are not capable of being legal and it was not granted by deed. Abdul could have protected his contract by registering a notice. The contract did not actually transfer ownership to Abdul therefore CC were still the owners of WC and free to sell to Greg.
To conclude, Abdul may have entered into a valid contract, but this only gives him an equitable interest in WC so, the contract is not binding on