Hernando de Soto, in his book The Mystery of Capital (2000) suggests that the failure of capitalism in underdeveloped countries is due to the lack of effective Land Registration.  Without effective systems of proving title, the land market is severely hampered, home owners can't get mortgages and entrepreneurs are unable to raise capital.

Land Registration systems around the world are embracing Information Technology at a rapid pace.  But are systems moving in the right direction?  Information Technology can change the way business is done (example, see how the Insurance Industry was shook up by Direct Insurance).  Are Land Registration systems only paving the cowpath, instead of embracing revolutionary change?

In computerising Land Registration systems, attempts are being made to embrace electronic conveyancing, including the use of electronc signatures.  Are these red herrings that detract from the potential of Information Technology to produce simplified and more direct registration?  Instead of computerising existing conveyancing processes, perhaps we should be following Mike Hammer's advice: "don't computerise, obliterate."  

In Japan's traditional system a vendor and purchaser can attend at the Registry, and simply have the officials substitute the purchaser's name for the vendors's in the Register.  Can conveyancing and registration worldwide, using Information Technology, be similarly simplified?

The newly implemented (2007) Scottish direct entry system uses the Electronic Signatures of the solcitors acting for vendor and purchaser.  But a Solcitor, (or Notary Public, or other legal agent), is a transitory entity in so far as the recording of the ownerhip is concerned.  Shouldn't the registration system, instead, or in addition, record satisfactory identifiers of the Owner being recorded.  In the past, such identifiers were the production of the Land Certificate (a document issued to registered owners) and the signature of the owner.  A system of the future should use one or more biometric indicators, to ensure that the person presenting himself is in fact the registered owner.

New Zealand's landonline system uses Digital Certificates to securely identify the licensed agents transacting business with the Land Registry.  But how does a registered owner, wishing to sell, securely identify himself to the licensed agent?

In Europe, every country has a different land registration system.  The EU Commission is seeking ways to facilitate the community land market, including ways to reconcile the land registration systems across the European Community.

In my thesis A Model for Land Registration in the Information Age (1998) I described and justified a candidate model for a universal system of Land Registration, (based largely on analysis of the Irish situation).

First American Corporation has given an undertaking to the Clinton Foundation to produce a universal model for Land Registration that can be applied effectively in third world countries.  This model will draw on my thesis.

In most Land Registration systems, owners have to prove their title before they can be registered.  The process of official Examination of Title is often one that prevents owners getting on the Register, rather than facilitating their registration.  After 100 years of registration, vast numbers of titles are still unregistered.  Is there a better way for the future?  One option is Claim Registration.  In this system, persons claiming to be owners of interests in land would be obliged to register their claim.  If an owner can't provide evidence of hit title, he would be registered with Qualified Title.  After a period of years, if the claim is not contradicted, the registration would be converted automatically to Absolute Title.  Is there any example of such a system working in the past?  Yes!

The Californian Gold Rush (in the 1850s) provides one example of claim registration from the past.  There, the Miners' Association set up a register, where would-be prospectors registered their claims to plots of prospecting land.  This was necessary because the government agencies were unable to cope with the problem.  The titles were extra-legal, but, in time, the miners' claims, as registered, were legitimised.

The land market could be internationalised.  If universal rules were to apply to land registration, a person in one country could safely buy a Parcel of land in another country.  Parcels of land could be traded in the same manner as stocks and shares and commodoties.  In order for this to be effectective, the title of the registered owner selling the land would need to be guaranteed.  The guarantee would be effected by registration with Absolute Title.  Laws would have to be changed to ensure that anybody claiming an interest in land adverse to that of the registered owner would have to register their claims in order to stand up against a purchaser.  In other words, a purchaser would always get what appears on the register.  

--Last edited by Proinnsias O Cillin on 2007-03-24 20:25:58 --