Given that one of the intentions of the Law Commission in reforming the registra...

Law Essay Title: Given that one of the intentions of the Law Commission in reforming the
registration of title system was to reduce the scope for overriding
interests (see "Land Registration for the 21st Century", Law Com No. 271
para. 8.74), discuss how this might have been achieved in respect to
registered dispositions under the Land Registration Act 2002 for those
interests formerly covered by s.70(1)(g) of the Land Registration Act
1925.
Answers must include citations of relevant cases interpreting the
scope of s.70(1)(g) and a discussion of Schedule 3 paragraph 2 of the
2002 Act.
As a

Section 70(1)(g) seems to derive from the rule in unregistered
conveyancing that the fact of possession constitutes notice of the
rights of the possessor (see para 6-048 of Megarry & Wade). That might
be worth pointing out in the context of stating that the point of the
reform of the provision, and the fundamental objective of the 2002 Act,
is to create a register that is, as far as possible, conclusive as to
the state of title.

Note that "rent" is defined in s.3 of the 1925 Act.

Make sure you read the relevant parts of the 3rd Law Commission Report
"Land Registration for the Twenty-First Century: A Conveyancing
Revolution" (2001 Law Com No.271), in addition to the report referred
to in the question. It contains commentary on the draft legislation.
See, especially, para 8.6: "interests should only have overriding status
where protection against buyers was needed, but where it was neither
reasonable to expect nor sensible to require any entry on the register".

Suppose it might be helpful to identify cases in which the protection
of overriding interests under s.70(1)(g) has been perceived to operate
unfairly (perhaps the HofLs decision in Williams & Glyn v Boland [1981]
AC 487) - and see what the situation would be under the new Act.

An excellent book on the new Act is Harpum and Bignell's Registered Land
(2004). It would also be worth looking at Wolstenholme & Cherry's
annotated Land Registration Act 2002.
3rd Law Commission Report
"Land Registration for the Twenty-First Century: A Conveyancing
Revolution" (2001 Law Com No.271..See, especially, para 8.6:

identify cases in which the protection
of overriding interests under s.70(1)(g) has been perceived to operate
unfairly (perhaps the HofLs decision in Williams & Glyn v Boland [1981]
AC 487)

Harpum and Bignell's Registered Land
(2004)

Wolstenholme & Cherry's
annotated Land Registration Act 2002.

Land Law text and Material- N igel Gravells Third edition 2004