Grant of Easement: Plan and Registration Requirements for Mixed Registered/Unregistered Titles

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: <ul> <li> There is one dominant tenement, which is registered </li> <li> 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. </li> <li> All five servient tenements are owned by the same person. </li> <li> 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. </li> </ul> 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: <ol> <li> 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”. <ul> <li> 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? </li> <li> 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? </li> </ul> </li> <li> Signature and plan identification: <ul> <li> For compliance with rule 213 of the Land Registration Rules 2003, must the grantor sign each plan (if several are used) or is signature of a single master plan sufficient? </li> </ul> </li> <li> Registration focus: <ul> <li> 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? </li> <li> 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? </li> <li> 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? </li> </ul> </li> <li> Timing of registration: <ul> <li> 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? </li> <li> Would it be preferable (or required) for the easement to be registered before completion of the transfer? </li> </ul> </li> <li> Processing time and expedition: <ul> <li> Roughly how long does the Registry take to complete registration of a new easement against a registered title, and are there any mechanisms for expedition if a linked sale must await registration? </li> </ul> </li> </ol> 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

Jonathan - an interesting and very modern approach. Forgive me if I use an old fashioned way to respond 1. One plan is acceptable - see PG 40 supplement 2 and section 3 - you have not referred to that one - <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/preparing-plans-for-land-registry-applications/guidance-for-preparing-plans-for-land-registry-applications">Guidance for preparing plans for HM Land Registry applications - GOV.UK</a>  2. The plan(s) need(s) to be signed by all parties to the deed 3. The application can only be made against the registered titles involve. Your legal advice needs to focus on any 'special conditions' where a leasehold is concerned specifically if the tenant is the one granting the easement. If the superior title holder is granting it then you may have to provide evidence of their ownership and ability to do so - PG 62 explains the registration requirements but the legal requirements come first 4. Yes and yes - much will depend on whether your buyer is taking a mortgage or not as their lender will have the final say 5. Several months wait before processing starts. <a href="https://www.gov.uk/guidance/request-an-expedite">Request an expedite - GOV.UK</a>  Finally - hand drawn plans should be avoided as far as possible. PG 40 supplement 2 explains what we expect/need so do try and follow that guidance. The quality of a plan can have long-lasting impact and if 'poor' then that impact can be a negative one. Whilst that may not be an issue for you if you sell it may impact on your buyer's willingness to complete