Introductory Note:
I’ve used an AI drafting assistant to help me express points and questions clearly, but I’ve already read and tried to understand the relevant Land Registry Practice Guides (particularly PG62, PG40 and PG52) as well as earlier forum posts. I hope the questions are focused and not repetitive; my aim is simply to check that I’ve understood the correct procedure before asking my solicitor to act. I appreciate there are a lot of questions and I apologise for putting so much into one post, but it seemed like the best approach.
Hello,
I’d appreciate guidance on the correct form of plan and registration procedure for a long-standing water-supply easement we are finalising.
The position is as follows:
-
There is one dominant tenement, which is registered
-
The water pipe runs underground through five servient tenements. Only one of the servient tenements is currently registered, this being a leasehold with more than 200 years unexpired. The freehold reversion of this property does not appear to be registered, so the leaseholder is the only party shown on the Land Registry records.
-
All five servient tenements are owned by the same person.
-
The easement will grant the right for the dominant property to draw water in perpetuity, to maintain and repair the supply pipe, and to prevent interference with that supply.
We’ve studied Practice Guide 62 (Easements) and Practice Guide 40 (Supplement 2 – Preparing plans for HM Land Registry applications) but need to confirm how these apply in a mixed registered/unregistered context.
Could you please clarify the following points:
-
Scope of plans:
PG 62 § 2.6 says that deeds will “usually need to be accompanied by a plan showing the dominant and servient land”.
-
Where several unregistered parcels form the servient land, is one composite OS-based plan (showing all parcels and the full pipe route) acceptable, or must each registered title be shown on a separate plan?
-
If a composite plan is acceptable, what scale and mapping base are preferred where rural titles are involved (1:2500? 1:5000?), per PG 40 Supplement 1?
-
Signature and plan identification:
-
Registration focus:
-
Where only one servient title is registered, will the Registry’s concern extend solely to that title and the dominant title, or will a composite plan showing unregistered land also be retained for reference?
-
In other words, is the Registry interested only in the registered titles, or does it expect the deed plan to depict the whole route even across unregistered land?
-
Are there any special conditions, requirements, or considerations when registering a notice of easement against this leasehold title only, given that the underlying freehold is unregistered? For example, does the Registry require any additional documentation or consent from the freeholder, or can the easement notice be validly entered solely against the registered leasehold title?
-
Timing of registration:
-
If the easement deed is executed by the current owners of the dominant land, but the dominant title is then transferred before the easement is registered, can the easement still be registered afterwards?
-
Would it be preferable (or required) for the easement to be registered before completion of the transfer?
-
Processing time and expedition:
Finally, could you confirm whether a hand-drawn plan (annotated to OS scale but not plotted directly on an OS extract) would be likely to fail the Registry’s plan-quality standards under PG 40 Supplement 2, or whether acceptance depends on clarity and proportional accuracy rather than cartographic precision?
Many thanks in advance for your help.
Jonathan
