249 / 406
BOOK REVIEW
Land Law by Robert A. Pearce. Sweet and Maxwell.
245pp.; 1985. £15.75 Sterling.
Until the publication of "Land Law" the only
comprehensive book on the subject was "Irish Land
Law" by J.C.W. Wylie, published in 1975. However, the
very sight of such a voluminous tome with its mass of
detail and array of case references presents a daunting
picture even for the most zealous student.
"Land Law" will therefore be hailed as filling the gap
between the student and Wylie! In 237 pages it purports to
abstract and deal with the basic concepts to the intent that
once these have been mastered a more confident
progression to Irish Land Law is assured.
Part I comprising three short chapters covers clearly
and simply the term "property" and its classifications,
interests in land and their categories, the development of
equity and the doctrine of notice. Under the heading
Doctrine of Notice in Chapter 3, pursuant to the author's
avowed intention of "relating theory to practice", it
would not be out of place to mention appropriate
searches as one type of enquiry a Purchaser should make,
and the fact that he would be fixed with notice of any
adverse act which might appear whether or not he or his
Solicitor made such searches.
The Statute of Uses, which is fundamental to so many
areas of Land Law and to most title deeds, needs a closer
analysis than that accorded to it in Chapter 3 to make its
effects comprehensible. In particular, diagrams (which
the author uses so aptly) would be most effective to
illustrate the interests created by different limitations,
e.g., where the feoffe to uses is a freeholder and the
cestui
que
use a leaseholder, where the feoffee to uses is a
leaseholder and the
cestui que
use a freeholder, where the
feoffee to uses is a corporation and
cestui que
use a natural
person and vice versa and where the feoffee to uses holds a
greater or lesser freehold interest than the
cestui que
use.
Perhaps this elaboration might be incorporated into the
2nd edition of this book.
Part 2 under the heading "Ownership and its Limits"
comprises 6 chapters with such interesting titles as
"Fragmentation of Ownership through tenure" and "the
Division of Ownership over time". The chapters on
Ownership, Limits to Ownership and the brief history of
the feudal system make interesting reading even for a non-
legal aspirant.
I query the necessity (in a short book) of devoting two
separate sections — one in Chapter 7 and one in Chapter
8 — to expounding the terms "reversion" and
"remainder" which are two relatively simple concepts. It
would, however, be more precise to state (1) in Section 6
Chapter 7 that the fee simple is a remainder if disposed of
"by the same instrument"
rather than
"at the same time"
as the limited interest and (2) in Section 5 Chapter 8 that a
reversion is what is left over of a larger estate
"until"
or
"pending"
the expiry of the lesser estate rather than
"after"
the expiry of the lesser estate.
In Section 11 on Page 47 it is pointed out that two
conditions must be satisfied to bar the entail. The first
condition — the consent of the Protector is given, but the
second — enrolment of the deed is not. This omission
should be rectified.
The definition of Protector of the settlement in said
Section 11 as "the person (if any) in possession under a
prior freehold estate" is incomplete without the proviso
that such freehold estate be created by the same
settlement as the fee tail. This proviso would logically
provoke the question "what if the prior estate were not so
created?", which in turn must elicit the answer that the
tenant in tail though not in possession can bar the entail
without anyone's consent (provided of course there is no
special protector). The net result of this socratic exercise
must then lead to a qualification of the statement in
Section 11 that "if the tenant in tail is not in possession the
consent of the protector of the settlement must be
obtained". Section 11 should be expanded to take
account of these addenda.
The treatment of Future Interests in Chapter 8 should
help towards an understanding of the underlying
concepts which are sometimes difficult not only to detect
but also to apply in specific limitations.
Despite the merits of Chapter 8 the validity of the
second sentence in Section 2 must be queried. It purports
to attribute to the generic term "vested interest"
requisites which are those of the particular type of vested
interest — interest vested in interest. These requisites are
reproduced later in the Section and quite rightly so in
defining interest vested in interest in contradistinction to
interest vested in possession which is also defined. The
aforesaid first sentence is inaccurate and could puzzle
novice readers. It should therefore be deleted.
The conveyancing content in Chapters 10 and 11 in a
short book on Land Law should be a pleasant surprise.
The specimen Conveyance, Lease and Transfers and the
procedure for a sale from Contract to closing stages
cannot but prove both enlivening and enlightening.
INCORPORATED LAW SOCIETY
OF IRELAND
Solicitors^ Technology
Exhibition
4-5 OCTOBER, 1985
Blackhall Place, Dublin 7
237