Land Registration Act 2002 of England: Lessons on Title Registration Reform for China

• Author: Richard Wu
• Pages: 73-84

WU (DO NOT DELETE) 12/3/2012 7:53 PM

2012 TITLE REGISTRATION REFORM 73

LAND REGISTRATION ACT 2002 OF ENGLAND:

LESSONS ON TITLE REGISTRATION REFORM FOR CHINA

Richard Wu*

Abstract

In 2002, England adopted the Land Registration Act. This article analyses, first, the

evolution of the English legal regime for a title registration system which led to the passage of

the Act. It then evaluates the policy goal and major content of the Land Registration

Act. Finally, the author argues that China can learn many lessons from the Act. Firstly, the

technical quality of legislation is crucial to the successful implementation of a title

registration system. Secondly, such successful implementation is dependent on the prevailing

political, economic and social conditions. Thirdly, collaboration between government

departments responsible for policy formulation and implementation of title registration is also

crucial. With regard to electronic conveyancing, China should appreciate that although it

strives to achieve a system of ‘title b y registration’ from the existing system of ‘registration of

title, it is doubtful whether the English system of electronic conveyancing is compatible with

the current stage of Chinese development. However, on the issue of indemnity, China can

also learn from the Act by stipulating in its own indemnity provision the detailed

circumstances under which indemnity would be payable: for example, a formula for

calculating the amount of indemnity; a failure or reduction of claim for i ndemnity in the event

of fraud or lack of care, and the recovery of compensation by the registrar from person(s) who

cause or significantly contribute to loss through fraud. Finally, China can i mprove the

drafting of its land registration legislation in such a way that the overall powers of these land

registrations officers, as w ell as the circumstances under which they can ‘alter’ the land

registers, are defined more clearly.

I. INTRODUCTION

A comprehensive system for title registration was first developed

in civil law countries.1 Among common law countries, England and

Australia were the two oldest countries to adopt and develop such a

title registration system,2 while in the United States, such a system

* Associate Professor, Faculty of Law, University of Hong Kong. The research for this article was

fully supported by a grant from the General Research Fund of the Research Grants Council of Hong

Kong Special Administrative Region, China (Project No.HKU753409H).

1 For example, Germany started to develop its title registration system in the thirteenth century. See

Stein, R., The “Principles, Aims and Hopes” of Title By Registration, 9 ADEL. L. REV. 267, 267 (1983).

For an analysis of the development of title registration system in Germany, see MURRAY J. RAFF, M. J.,

PRIVATE PROPERTY AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESPON SIBILITY: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF GERMAN

REAL PROPERTY LAW (2003).

2 For an discussion of the parallel development of title registration system in Australia and

England, see Douglas Whalan, Immediate Success of Registration of Title in Australia and Early

Failures in England, 2 NEW ZEALAND U. L. REV. 416 (1967).