An independent RES exam study resource — not a Government website and not affiliated with the Council for Estate Agencies (CEA).Find My OrderHow to identify official CEA sources
Home / Free RES questions / State land grants

Paper 1 · Lesson 4 — State Land, Estates, Future Interests and Easements

State land grants

The modes by which the State alienates land (the five grants: fee simple, estate in perpetuity, State lease, TOL, tenancy agreement).

2 questionsAnswers & explanations includedFree — no sign-up

Question 1

Two applications for State land come before the Collector on the same morning. The first is from a manufacturing company which wants a cleared parcel in an industrial estate for a purpose-built plant, and which has said in its covering letter that it needs the longest term available to justify the capital cost. The second is from the owner of an adjoining freehold plot in a residential area, who has applied for a narrow residual strip left over when the road was realigned in the 1970s. The strip cannot be built on by itself, has no frontage of its own, and is wanted so that a single development can be put up across it and his own land together.

Which statement is correct?

  1. A. Both fall under the ordinary rule of not less than ten and not more than ninety-nine years.
  2. B. The company falls under the ordinary rule; the strip may match the adjoining title.
  3. C. Both may be granted any term the President approves, no ceiling applying to State leases.
  4. D. The company may be granted up to nine hundred and ninety-nine years; the strip ninety-nine.
Show the answer and full explanation

Answer: B

The rule. The title ordinarily issued for State land is a lease of not less than ten years and not more than ninety-nine. There is one exception: where the land cannot be developed independently and is required for development together with the applicant's adjoining land, the title issued may match the title of that adjoining land.

Why B is correct. The company falls within the ordinary rule. The residual strip is exactly the case the exception is written for — it cannot be built on alone and is wanted for amalgamation.

The other options.

  • A applies the ordinary rule to both and misses the exception.
  • C removes the ceiling entirely.
  • D invents a ceiling for the company that has no basis and applies the ordinary one to the strip.

Exam note. The floor is as real as the ceiling: not less than ten years. Candidates remember ninety-nine and forget that a State lease of five years is not the ordinary form either.

The title ordinarily issued for State land is a lease of not less than ten years and not more than ninety-nine →

Question 2

A salesperson is marketing two units in the same district and has been reading their titles over the weekend. The first is in a development held on a lease of one hundred and three years, granted by the freeholder of the land, who carved it out of his own title in 1962 when the estate was laid out. The second is in an older walk-up block whose units were sold on leases of nine hundred and ninety-nine years. A colleague who has sat the examination twice tells her over coffee that both titles are irregular, since no lease of land in Singapore may run beyond ninety-nine years, and that the second is really a freehold in all but name given how long it has to run.

Which statement is correct?

  1. A. Both are irregular; the ninety-nine-year ceiling applies to any lease of land.
  2. B. The first is irregular; the second is not, being a freehold given its length.
  3. C. Neither is irregular, and a term of that length amounts to a freehold in law.
  4. D. Neither is irregular; the ceiling binds State leases, and both are leasehold.
Show the answer and full explanation

Answer: D

The rule. The ninety-nine-year ceiling governs leases the State issues. A freeholder carving a lease out of his own land is not bound by it and may grant any term he likes. However long a lease runs, it remains leasehold — the length of the term does not change its character.

Why D is correct. Both leases were granted by private freeholders, so neither is irregular, and both are leasehold whatever their length.

The other options.

  • A applies the State ceiling to private grants.
  • C gets the first half right and then converts a long lease into a freehold, which is the instinct the 999-year term is placed in the stem to provoke.
  • B does both errors at once.

Exam note. Two separate questions hide in one set of facts — *who granted it* and *what is it*. Answer them in that order and the option set falls apart cleanly.

A freeholder carving a lease out of his own land is not bound by it and may grant any term he likes →

Practise it under exam conditions

Single questions test whether you know a rule. The paper tests whether you can find it in a scenario, at speed, with three plausible alternatives in the way. Start with the free 20-question half-paper.

Looking for past-year papers? CEA doesn't publish them — here's what it does publish.

Independent study material. Not affiliated with or endorsed by the Council for Estate Agencies. No pass guarantee — for study use only.