EQUITY'S INTERVENTION IN THE INDEFEASIBILITY OF TITLE

Abstract

The Singapore Land Titles Act 1959 has helped to simplify land conveyancing in the country by providing a simplified system for parties with interests and rights in land to lodge them through the Land Titles Registry. The Act relies on the principle of indefeasibility as its central tenet, similar to the Torrens system in Australia, where the Act has adopted its system from. The registration of an individual’s interest grants it an indefeasible title, which gives the individual priority over the interest one has lodged. As its name suggests, there are only few exceptions to the principle of indefeasibility. The landmark case of Bebe has reaffirmed the stance of local courts’ on the indefeasible title as the central tenet of Singapore’s land registration system. However, there are many academics who wonder if the principle of indefeasibility is too harsh on victims who have lost their titles to fraud. This paper thus aims to highlight differences in legal systems regarding the exceptions to the indefeasible title and recommend equitable changes that would aid in the fine-tuning of the current land registration system in Singapore. This research seeks to compare different land registration systems, the different exceptions to the principle of indefeasibility, and discusses if equity should intervene to provide remedies to safeguard the interests of all victims.