The outcome would be in line with the decision in Chaudhary v Yavuz, where it was deemed that Mr Chaudhary’s interest was not capable of binding a third party without registration, even though the interest would have bound the original assuring party. This follows the provision within section 116 of the Land Registration Act 2002

The advice would remain consistent between scenarios. Section 116 of the Land Registration Act 2002 establishes that unregistered interests are capable of binding successors in title. In this instance, it would be on the basis of Zack exercising an interest (the equity by estoppel) in actual occupation (schedule 3 paragraph 2 of the Land Registration Act 2002)

Unfortunately, the arrangement would not be enforceable against Warren, because it was entirely informal, and property rights must be formalised by registration if they are to bind subsequent purchasers

The advice would remain consistent between scenarios; there has still been an assurance made and detrimental reliance upon that assurance, so the right has arisen by estoppel. An interest arising by estoppel is a property interest that will always bind