CICT

Question 1

What is the aim of CICT

Answer 1

to adjust couple’s property rights upon failure of relationship

Question 2

what did Pettit v Pettit and Gissing v Gissing establish

Answer 2

they both established that it is possible for someone who isn’t a legal owner to have a beneficial interest in the family home, under a constructive trust

Question 3

CICT usually applies to who (2)

Answer 3

mortgage lenders

cohabiting couples

Question 4

what did Appleton, Burns and Stack v Dowden argue

Answer 4

that the law isn’t supposed to be fair and reasonable, when acquiring who gets what share of the property

Question 5

2 stage test in Rosset

Answer 5

1) is there an express agreement to share property

2) detrimental reliance?

Question 6

how can we establish detrimental reliance (2)

Answer 6

• direct contributions to purchase price

- onerous labour

Question 7

Grant v Edwards outcome

Answer 7

applying Eves v Eves:

• there was express agreement to share home
• yes there was detrimental reliance- indirect payments are DR

Question 8

Geary v Rankine outcome

Answer 8

no intention to share home expressed

Question 9

Rosset outcome (3)

Answer 9

• A joint venture to renovate home does not amount to an implied agreement to share ownership
• she did what most partners do
• outcome: she loses- bank sells house to pay debts

Question 10

Thomson v Humphrey outcome (3)

Answer 10

• must go beyond what a normal person would do
• detriment must be real and in reliance, and no agreement to share ownership
• she did not have a beneficial interest in the home

Question 11

James v Thomas outcome

Answer 11

vague assurance will not amount to agreement to share home

• there will be no beneficial interest

Question 12

Ungurian v Lensoff outcome

Answer 12

evidence must be convincing

Question 13

Culliford v Thorpe outcome (3)

Answer 13

• there was agreement to share/ co-own
• what is the detriment? the building work he did
• outcome: there was a common intention in equal shares

Question 14

after the acquisition stage, what comes next

Answer 14

the quantification stage

Question 15

Springette v Defoe

Answer 15

usually what you put in is what you get out

Question 16

Midland Bank plc v Cooke

Answer 16

• flexible approach
• both got 50%
• evidence of equal partnership

Question 17

Oxley v Hiscock- what did the court seek to do

Answer 17

the court seeked to broaden the circumstances in which a person might prove a common intention by allowing such intention to arise from all of the facts and circumstances of the case

Question 18

Oxley.v Hiscock outcome

Answer 18

Ms Oxley had a beneficial interest in the home, and although her share was not equal to the initial cash contribution, the other payments she made were to be taken into account

Question 19

gender stereotype case

Answer 19

Cooke v Head (No 1)

Question 20

acquisition stage- 2 cases

Answer 20

• Rosset

- Stack v Dowden

Question 21

quantification stage case

Answer 21

Stack v Dowden

Question 22

what was held Stack v Dowden (3)

Answer 22

• where legal title was held jointly, beneficial interest would be held jointly
• presumption may be displaced where there is evidence that this was not their intention
• couple did not intend their shares to be equal- they kept everything separate

Question 23

Stack v Dowden outcome

Answer 23

• court held the parties’ beneficial shares in the property should reflect their financial contributions towards it
• the beneficial shares were unequal because the couple kept finances and everything separate

Question 24

why did Piska critique lady Hale’s judgment in Stack

-what does her list of factors suggest …

Answer 24

• she argued that Hale’s background in family law influenced how she constructed intention
• her list of factors suggest that an intention to share will depend on whether the parties’ relationship indicates a shared life

Question 25

what was held in Graham-York v York

Answer 25

the court is not concerned with redistributive justice

Question 26

what was the main analogy in Jones v Kernott (CICT responds to what?)

Answer 26

CICT responds to a change of intention

Question 27

what stage do Stack, and Jones both apply to

Answer 27

the quantification stage for SLO and JLO cases

Question 28

which case followed Stack

Answer 28

Aspden v Elvy

Question 29

Laskar v Laskar analogy

Answer 29

most CICT involve romantic couples, but this case involved a commercial investment between a mother and daughter