File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
  • Find via Find It@HKUL
Supplementary

Article: Land Registration Act 2002 of England: lessons on title registration reform for China

TitleLand Registration Act 2002 of England: lessons on title registration reform for China
Authors
Issue Date2011
PublisherJoe Christensen, Inc. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.tsinghua.edu.cn/docsn/fxy/tclr/tclr.htm
Citation
Tsinghua China Law Review, 2011, v. 4 n. 1, p. 69-82 How to Cite?
AbstractIn 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 by 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 indemnity 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 improve the drafting of its land registration legislation in such a way that the overall powers of these land registrations officers, as well as the circumstances under which they can ‘alter’ the land registers, are defined more clearly.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/164863
ISSN

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorWu, RWSen_US
dc.date.accessioned2012-09-20T08:11:21Z-
dc.date.available2012-09-20T08:11:21Z-
dc.date.issued2011en_US
dc.identifier.citationTsinghua China Law Review, 2011, v. 4 n. 1, p. 69-82en_US
dc.identifier.issn2151-8904-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/164863-
dc.description.abstractIn 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 by 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 indemnity 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 improve the drafting of its land registration legislation in such a way that the overall powers of these land registrations officers, as well as the circumstances under which they can ‘alter’ the land registers, are defined more clearly.-
dc.languageengen_US
dc.publisherJoe Christensen, Inc. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.tsinghua.edu.cn/docsn/fxy/tclr/tclr.htmen_US
dc.relation.ispartofTsinghua China Law Reviewen_US
dc.titleLand Registration Act 2002 of England: lessons on title registration reform for Chinaen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.emailWu, RWS: richwswu@hku.hken_US
dc.identifier.authorityWu, RWS=rp01290en_US
dc.identifier.hkuros210497en_US
dc.identifier.volume4-
dc.identifier.issue1-
dc.identifier.spage69-
dc.identifier.epage82-
dc.publisher.placeUnited States-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats