9. Co-ownership Flashcards
AG Securities v Vaughan
JT cannot exist unless the ‘four unities’ are present
Payne v Webb
In equal shares
Fisher v Wigg
To be divided between…
Bull v Bull
Purchasers are presumed to take as TICs in equity in proportion to their respective contributions
Stack v Dowden
In context of ‘domestic’ properties presumption of TIC arising from unequal purchase contributions will not apply
Jones v Kernott
Presumption is that, where ‘home’ is held in joint names, equitable title is also held as JTs, even if contributions unequal
Lake v Craddock
Jus accrescendi inter mercatoeres locum non habet – right of survivorship has no place in business
Pink v Lawrence
These presumptions can be rebutted by any express declaration to the contrary
Re Caines
JT cannot be severed by will
Re Draper’s Conveyance
Application to court for order that house be sold and proceeds split equally - this was a notice in writing that severed JT
Harris v Goddard
Divorce petition, which made no immediate claim, but prayed (sought) for property adjustment order to be made in future, was not enough to sever the JT
In re 88 Berkeley Road
Notice validly served, provided it is SENT to last place of abode, even if intended recipient didn’t actually receive it
Kinch v Bullard
Notice validly served if LEFT at last known place of anode, even if intended recipient doesn’t receive it and person severing subsequently changes her mind
Williams v Hensman
Three additional ways JT can be severed
- Act operating on his own share
- Mutual agreement
- Mutual conduct
Ahmed v Kenrick
Severance held to have occurred when husband sold jointly owned house by forging his wife’s signature on both contract and registered transfer
First National Securities v Hegerty
Husband purported to mortgage jointly owned property by forging wife’s signature – held to be a charge on his equitable interest only, which severed JT
Re Gorman
Bankruptcy automatically has effect of transferring bankrupt’s assets to T in bankruptcy, thus severing any JT
Burgess v Rawnsley
R orally agreed to sell her share to H for £750 but then changed her mind and wanted £1000, nothing agreed at death - held: there was agreement (albeit not in writing and not enforceable) for R to sell share to H for £750 – sufficient to effect severance
Gore and Snell v Carpenter
Negotiations regarding each party taking one of two jointly owned homes absolutely don’t amount to a course of dealing such as to suggest that, over the years, parties have treated their interests in property as interests in common and not joint
Davis v Smith
Mere agreement to put jointly owned property on market could not sever JT, but here parties had gone further (by e.g. indicating that when the house was sold the proceeds would be divided, seeking legal advice on severance), so there was severance by mutual conduct
Carr v Isard
Differences in will between husband and wife (one refers to her ‘share’ of property, the other not) doesn’t support common intention to sever
Re Woolnough (Deceased)
Both wills contained clear instructions that life interests in a ‘share’ be given, which was inconsistent with JT – this demonstrated an agreement to hold distinct shares and amounted to severance
In Re Buchanan-Wollaston’s Conveyance
Court refuses order for sale of plot of land in front of owners’ houses, since underlying purpose of contract was to stop it being sold for development
Jones v Challenger
Order for sale granted: house acquired as a matrimonial home, so with end of marriage purpose was dissolved and primacy of duty to sell was restored
In Re Ever’s Trust
Court refused to order a sale – underlying purpose of trust was to provide home for couple and children for the indefinite future, so it would be inconsistent with this purpose to order a sale
The Mortgage Corporation v Shaire
Neuberger J: TLATA had changed the law and the court had greater flexibility in dealing with applications
Bank of Ireland v Bell
Interest of secured creditor contributed significantly to court’s decision not to postpone sale
Putnam v Taylor
Secured creditor given precedence over other factors, e.g. poor health of husband
Dennis v Mcdonald
Court refused to order a sale, but ordered man to pay occupation rent to woman that amounted to half a fair rent for premises
In Re Citro (Domenico)
‘Voice of the creditors will usually prevail over the voice of the other spouse and a sale of the property ordered within a short period’
Re Mott
Elderly lady who had lived in her house for over 40 years was allowed to remain - sale would be extremely detrimental to mother’s health and agreed to postpone sale until after death
Re Raval
Short postponement of an order for sale was allowed where there was a paranoid schizophrenic spouse who could have been seriously affected by a move
Re Bremner
Bankrupt suffering from terminal cancer and had months to live – sale postponed for 3 months after death to allow elderly spouse to care for him in their own home during the latter stages of his life
Barca v Mears
Order for sale granted in spite of presence of son with learning difficulties - judge accepts narrow approach to ‘exceptional circumstances’ might be inconsistent with ECHR, Art 8
Ford v Alexander
Stresses importance of striking a balance between rights of creditors and respect for privacy and home of debtor
