TOLATA 1996: A holistic approach

Mark Pawlowski looks at how the courts calculate the parties’ beneficial shares when events post-acquisition give rise to a claim to an enlarged share in the jointly owned family home ‘The courts take a holistic approach to the question of the assessment of the parties’ respective shares, so that, although financial contributions play an important …
This post is only available to members.

Co-Ownership: Inference, imputation and child maintenance

Barnes v Phillips explores the circumstances in which the beneficial shares of unmarried co-owners should be varied, as Mark Simeon Jones explains ‘This evolution of the modern law has been marked by two significant milestones; first, the judgment of the House of Lords in Stack v Dowden, and second, the judgment of the Supreme Court …
This post is only available to members.

Barnes v Phillips [2015] EWCA Civ 1056

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | January/February 2016 #156

88 Leyland Road, London (property) was purchased by the parties in January 1996 for approximately £135,000 using approximately £25,000 from their savings for the deposit and taking out a joint repayment mortgage for the balance with HSBC. It was registered in their names as joint tenants. Both contributed to the cost of installing double glazing, resurfacing the driveway and landscaping the garden. The appellant, who had acquired other buy-to-let properties in his sole name, told the respondent in early 2005 that he wanted to remortgage the property because of debt problems. The property...

Beneficial Ownership: Fair shares

Mark Pawlowski considers some potentially far-reaching implications arising from recent case law on ownership of the family home ‘In the case of a purchase in joint names, the presumption of joint ownership in law and equity prevailed in the absence of contrary intention at the time of purchase or following acquisition of the property.’The Supreme …
This post is only available to members.

Trusts: Different rules

Luke Barnes highlights the cohabitant cases that fall outside of the judgment in Jones v Kernott and the applicable case law ‘The claimant in sole name cases continues to face a stern test to establish a beneficial interest by virtue of an inferred common intention. In particular, it continues to be unclear what conduct may …
This post is only available to members.