You’re reviewing a past SQE1 FLK2 practice question on a dispute between joint tenants over sale proceeds — and suddenly realise you can’t recall whether section 14 of the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 gives the court power to order sale *or* just postpone it. You flip back through notes. The wording feels slippery. You’ve read about Stack v Dowden, but what if the facts point to Jones v Kernott? And then there’s that easement question where the “dominant tenement” wasn’t clearly identified — did you spot it? You’re not behind on time. You’re behind on *certainty*. That’s where FLK2 Land Law trips up even strong candidates.
Why SQE1 FLK2 Land Law Feels Different from Undergraduate Study
At university, Land Law often rewards deep doctrinal analysis — tracing equitable interests across centuries, debating the fairness of Lloyds Bank v Rosset, or unpacking the policy behind the Law of Property Act 1925. But SQE1 FLK2 isn’t testing your ability to write an essay. It’s testing whether you can apply precise statutory rules and binding authority to tight, fact-led scenarios — in under 90 seconds per question.
The SRA doesn’t ask “Discuss the evolution of co-ownership”. It asks: “X and Y hold Blackacre as joint tenants. X dies. Y sells Blackacre to Z without informing the estate. Is Z bound by the deceased’s beneficial interest?” That’s a Trusts of Land + overreaching + registration question — all in one sentence.
So forget abstract theory. Focus instead on the three pillars the SRA consistently tests in FLK2 Land Law:
- Co-ownership — especially the distinction between joint tenancy and tenancy in common, severance (by notice, conduct or mutual agreement), and applications for sale under TLATA 1996;
- Easements and profits à prendre — the four characteristics in Re Ellenborough Park, creation methods (express grant/reservation, implication, prescription), and registration requirements;
- Legal estates and interests — particularly which interests bind purchasers (overriding interests under Schedule 3, LRA 2002), and how overriding interests interact with actual occupation.
Co-ownership: Joint Tenancy vs Tenancy in Common — What Actually Matters for SQE1
This isn’t just about definitions. It’s about consequences — especially death, bankruptcy, and sale.
If two people hold land as joint tenants, the right of survivorship applies automatically. When one dies, their interest ends — no matter what their will says. But if they hold as tenants in common, each owns a distinct share (equal unless stated otherwise), and that share passes under their will or intestacy.
The key trigger for SQE1 is severance. You must know the four valid methods — and crucially, which ones work without notice to the other co-owner.
Section 36(2) of the Law of Property Act 1925 allows severance by written notice — but only if served effectively. In Re Draper’s Conveyance, the court held that notice need not be acknowledged or received — delivery to the last known address suffices. Contrast this with severance by mutual agreement (Gore and Snell v Carpenter) or by course of conduct (Williams v Hensman), which require clear evidence of intention.
Here’s what to do: When practising MCQs, underline every reference to death, bankruptcy, or attempted sale. Then ask: Was there severance? If yes, when — and by what method? If no, survivorship applies. Don’t get distracted by who paid the mortgage or who lived there — those affect beneficial shares under trust law, not the legal estate itself.
Easements: The Four Characteristics and Why Prescription Still Counts
SQE1 FLK2 won’t ask you to draft an easement clause. It will ask whether an arrangement satisfies the four characteristics laid down in Re Ellenborough Park: (1) there must be a dominant and servient tenement; (2) the easement must accommodate the dominant tenement; (3) the dominant and servient owners must be different people; and (4) the right must be capable of forming the subject matter of a grant.
That fourth point trips many candidates up. A right to park one car may be fine (Moncrieff v Jamieson). But a right to park “any number of vehicles” likely fails — it’s too vague and potentially exclusive (Regent Properties v London Borough of Westminster). And remember: a mere licence — even long-standing — isn’t an easement unless it meets all four criteria.
Prescription matters because it’s still tested — and still governed by the Prescription Act 1832, not the LRA 2002. You need 20 years’ uninterrupted use “as of right” — i.e., without force, secrecy, or permission. In Sturman v Bridgeman, the court confirmed that “as of right” means the user must be open, peaceful, and without consent — even if the owner never objected.
Action step: For every easement question, tick off the four characteristics first — before touching prescription or registration. If the dominant tenement is missing (e.g., “a right to cross land for public access”), it fails at step one. No need to go further.
Overriding Interests: Where Actual Occupation Really Counts
This is where Land Law meets conveyancing reality — and where SQE1 FLK2 draws heavily from the Land Registration Act 2002. Overriding interests bind a registered proprietor even if unregistered — but only if they appear in Schedule 3.
The most frequently tested item is paragraph 2: the interest of a person in actual occupation. But “actual occupation” isn’t just sleeping there. In Chhokar v Chhokar, the court held that a woman who had moved out temporarily due to domestic violence remained in actual occupation — her intention to return was clear. In contrast, Strand Securities v Caswell found no actual occupation where the claimant hadn’t visited the property for months and had no intention to return.
Crucially, paragraph 2 has two limbs: (a) the interest must be proprietary (e.g., a beneficial interest under a trust, not just a licence); and (b) the occupier must be in actual occupation at the time of the disposition — usually the date of registration, not the date of contract.
In Thompson v Foy, the court clarified that “actual occupation” includes visible signs — furniture, personal effects, utility accounts — not just physical presence. But mere “badges of ownership” (like a name on the deeds) don’t count. Look for evidence of day-to-day use.
What to do: When you see “registered title”, “buyer”, and “unregistered interest” in the same question, scan immediately for Schedule 3, paragraph 2. Ask: Is it proprietary? Is there actual occupation *at registration*? If both are yes — and the buyer didn’t inspect — the interest overrides. If the buyer inspected and saw occupation, they’re bound anyway (paragraph 2(c)).
FLK2 Land Law in Context: How It Fits With Property Law and Practice
Don’t treat Land Law in isolation. It overlaps directly with Property Law and Practice (PLP) — another FLK2 subject. In PLP, you’ll apply Land Law concepts to conveyancing steps: checking for overriding interests during searches, drafting TR1 forms, advising on joint ownership structures, or spotting defective easements in title documents.
That’s why CELE’s FLK2 courses integrate cross-subject drills — e.g., a single scenario where you must identify both the Land Law issue (is this an easement or licence?) and the PLP consequence (does it need to be noted on the register?). SQE1 FLK2 doesn’t test siloed knowledge. It tests functional understanding.
And while SQE2 doesn’t feature Land Law as a standalone skill, it appears implicitly in Client Interviewing (advising a co-owner on severance options) and Case and Matter Analysis (spotting overriding interests in a purchase file). So getting FLK2 Land Law right now saves time later.
Your FLK2 Land Law Revision Checklist — Actionable & Exam-Ready
Here’s what to do — not just read — in the next 10 days:
- Map every SQE1 FLK2 Land Law question you’ve got to one of these three buckets: co-ownership, easements, or overriding interests. If it doesn’t fit — reread the stem. You missed the core issue.
- Memorise the exact wording of TLATA 1996 s.14(1): “Any trustee of land… may make an application to the court for an order… for the sale of the land…” — not “may apply for a sale”. Precision matters.
- Practise spotting “actual occupation” using real conveyancing red flags: mail addressed to occupier, council tax records, photos showing furniture. Not “they used to live there”.
- Time yourself on 10-question bursts — strictly 15 minutes. If you exceed 90 seconds per question twice in a row, pause and rework the underlying rule.
Land Law isn’t about memorising every case. It’s about knowing which rule resolves which factual tension — and doing it fast enough to finish both FLK1 and FLK2 papers. That speed comes from pattern recognition, not passive review.
How CELE SQE can help: Our SQE1 FLK2 Course (£2,750 mid-term / £1,750 short-term) includes targeted Land Law modules built around real SRA-style questions — with video walkthroughs of exactly how to dissect easement and co-ownership stems. We also offer the full FLK2 textbook set (£570) and SQE1 Question Bank (£575/month), updated monthly with new Land Law scenarios. Need support? Reach us on WeChat SQE100, email [email protected], or visit celebar.com.