LAND REGISTRATION BILL [H.L.] (Hansard, 14 June 1966)

§ THE LORD CHANCELLOR
On Clause 1 stand part, your Lordships may remember that during the Second Reading debate the noble Viscount, Lord Colville of Culross, asked me whether the provision with regard to indemnity made by the Bill was the result of the Fund being in low water—although I do not think he used that phrase. He said: I must say that when I first read it, and before I had heard the noble Lord's explanation, I wondered whether it was because there had been some undue run on the Land Registry's Indemnity Fund caused by people claiming indemnity although they themselves had been in the wrong, though not fraudulent, in causing the mistake to be made."—[OFFICIAL RFPORT, Vol. 274 (No. 17), col. 1302; 24/5/66.] I said in reply: That is not the case at all. The total amount paid out is relatively small. Speaking from memory, I think it is something like £20,000 during the whole time that the Fund has been in existence." (col. 1308.) I have since had an opportunity of checking that, and I find it is in fact £30,000. But the amount—and this is over a long period of years—standing to the credit of the Fund to-day is about £88,000. So there is no question of its being insolvent. But there might at any time be one very large claim arising, unless this Bill is passed, due to the applicant's own fault. It is that situation which 54 the clause is designed to meet. I thought that, having mentioned the figure of £20,000 and finding it to be £30,000, I should say so.

§ LORD DERWENT
Unfortunately, my noble and learned friend Lord Colville of Culross could not be here to-day, but I will make certain that he is asked to read what the noble and learned Lord has said.

§ THE LORD CHANCELLOR
This Amendment is moved simply to correct a drafting error. As at present drawn, Clause 2(2) reads: This section shall be construed as one with the Land Registration Act 1925. In fact, Clause 1 also is concerned with the Land Registration Act 1925, and therefore that Act ought to be construed with this Bill as a whole and not merely with Clause 2 of it. Accordingly this clause should read: This Act "— not "This section"— shall be construed as one with the Land Registration Act 1925". I am sorry the point was not noticed before. I beg to move.