Land is Power
The courts operate a sexist land policy that favours men. When women marry, their land is regarded as their husbands' property. If they divorce, the courts will redistribute the land by authorising law officials to sign Land Registry transfer documents to dispossess them.
Marriage is a contract between two parties and the State (the principal party). The terms of the contract, including the land policy, are not disclosed. The courts operate the policy on behalf of the State, in violation of human rights treaties. For example:
Protocol 1, Article 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights states that:
"Every natural or legal person is entitled to the peaceful enjoyment of his possessions. No one shall be deprived of his possessions except in the public interest and subject to the conditions provided for by law and the general principles of international law."
The courts' officers (Law Society members) allege that the land policy is in the public interest - but it only benefits men. It is not in the public interest to deprive women of land.
Miscarriages of Justice
The most notable case of dispossession is White v White (1994 - 2000). Pamela White (now Greenslade), a lifelong, hardworking farmer and entrepreneur, had established her own farm business. She invited husband Martin to become her business partner, expanded the farming enterprise, raised their children and cared for elderly relatives. Then Pamela was threatened, ousted and dispossessed - but at least escaped the same fate as landowning farmer Kate Prout.
It would have been a simple matter to dissolve and wind up the Whites' business partnership and share their two farms (neither of which were inherited) but, as the Law Lords commented in Miller v Miller & McFarlane v McFarlane (2006) in reference to White v White, "practice had become entrenched."
When landowners are divorcing, access is denied to the chancery court, preventing women from preserving their positions. Partnership agreements and business laws are disregarded. The routine procedure of dissolving and winding up business partnerships and taking final accounts to determine the partners' financial entitlements is blocked. Women are forced into the family court, against their wishes, to be arbitrarily dispossessed.
There is no remedy against dispossession.
The lack of legal will to challenge the land policy has allowed it to continue, resulting in more dispossessions and compensation claims against the Government.
If you have been dispossessed and seek repossession and compensation, please make contact.