The Oral Gift, the Family Sale and the Registered Mortgage in Hebron
In 1965 the late Salim Q. registered four dunums of land in Hebron in his own name in the land registry. In 1990 he told his son Adel, in front of witnesses, that the northern dunum was 'yours'; Adel built a three-storey house there at his own expense and has lived in it openly ever since. Nothing was put in writing and title stayed registered to Salim. Salim died in 2005 leaving three sons - Adel, Walid and Hani - and two daughters. In 2020 Walid, Hani and the two daughters sold the entire four dunums to a Ramallah investment company for 400,000 JD under a power of attorney; the sale was registered in 2021 and the company then mortgaged the land to a bank for 250,000 JD. In 2025 the company sued to evict Adel and his family. Adel relies on his father's gift, on the family's knowledge of it, and on thirty-five years of open possession.
1. Does Adel own the northern dunum? Address the gift, prescription and the effect of the 2020 sale.
Read the worked answer
The gift. Ownership of registered land passes only by registration in the land registry. An oral declaration that a plot is 'yours', even before witnesses, does not transfer the registered title and cannot be registered now because the donor is dead. Adel has at most an unperformed promise of gift, which is defective in form, and possibly a personal claim for reliance loss against the estate - not a right in rem. The witnesses prove that the words were said; they cannot prove that title moved.
Prescription. Adel must show possession that is continuous, open, peaceful and adverse for the statutory period, generally fifteen years. His possession began with his father's permission, and permissive possession does not run against the owner, however long it lasts. Time could only begin to run when the permission ended, arguably at Salim's death in 2005, and even then the family context suggests toleration rather than adversity. Courts require clear evidence of a change of character, typically a demand and a refusal. Twenty years of occupation by a son of the deceased, in a house the family treated as his, is arguable but not strong.
The 2020 sale - the strongest point. Adel is an heir. On Salim's death the four dunums devolved on the five children, and Adel's share is two-eighths of the estate, one quarter, roughly one dunum. The other four heirs could sell only their own shares; they could not convey Adel's. Registration of the whole plot in the company's name is ineffective as against his inherited share, and he can bring an action for rectification of the register and for cancellation of the sale to that extent.
Conclusion: not the whole northern dunum, but certainly his one-quarter inherited share.
2. In the eviction claim, what can Adel plead and what will the court do about the three-storey house?
Read the worked answer
Title and possession. Eviction is an action for recovery of possession based on title. The company's registered title is good against everything except the share that was never the sellers' to convey. Adel's first and best defence is therefore partial: he is a co-owner of one quarter by inheritance and cannot be evicted from his own undivided share. The court can order the parties to partition or to sell in lieu of partition if the property cannot be divided conveniently.
The house. For the remaining three quarters Adel is a possessor without title, but not in bad faith: he built with his father's blessing, openly, and the family knew. The good-faith builder rule gives the court a choice: order removal of the buildings at the builder's expense, or order the owner to pay the value of the materials and labour, or the increase in the value of the land, whichever the court considers fair. Demolishing a family home to leave an empty plot enriches nobody, so courts usually order compensation, assessed by an expert, sometimes reduced by occupation rent.
Set-off. The company may counterclaim mesne profits or occupation rent for the period of unauthorised occupation, and the court will net the compensation against it.
Practical strategy. Plead the inherited share first, seek rectification of the register, offer to buy the remaining shares at valuation, and in the alternative claim compensation for the buildings. Ask for a stay or a grace period on any eviction order given the children living in the house, and register a notice of the lawsuit against the title so that any further dealing with the land is caught.
3. How does the bank's mortgage affect Adel, and what should he do about it?
Read the worked answer
Nature of the mortgage. A registered mortgage is a right in rem over the land that follows it into whosever hands it comes. It does not depend on who occupies the property, and it is unaffected by the eviction suit, which is a dispute about possession, not about the bank's security.
Priority. Priority is fixed by the date of registration. The company registered the purchase in 2021 and mortgaged to the bank afterwards, so as between the company and the bank the bank ranks first over the whole plot as registered. If the company defaults, the bank can execute against the land regardless of who lives there, and a buyer at the execution sale takes subject to whatever interests survive.
Adel's exposure and protection. The mortgage was granted over the whole four dunums, including the quarter that was never validly sold. Since Adel's share never validly left the family, the company could not validly mortgage it, and the bank's security is ineffective to that extent unless the bank can show it relied in good faith on the register - a real risk, because registration is what the bank checks. Adel should immediately register a notice of his lawsuit against the title so that the bank and any future purchaser have notice, notify the bank in writing of his claim, and consider applying to the court for an interim order restraining disposal or further encumbrance pending the rectification claim.
Advice to the client: do not ignore the mortgage. Silence lets the bank proceed as if the title were clean, and by the time of execution the property may have been sold to a third party against whom recovery is much harder.