Co-ownership of Land Flashcards
Four friends bought a property together to live in when they all got jobs in the same city. The property was registered in the names of all four friends and the transfer stated that they held the property as tenants in common in equity in equal shares. Two of the friends now want the property sold as they have moved away to different cities and will not be living in the property in the future. The remaining friends do not want the property to be sold.
Which of the following statements best describes the process for resolving the dispute?
Option a: If an application to the court for an order to determine the dispute between the friends is made, the court must give the greatest weight to the purposes for which the property subject to the trust is held.
Option b: Any of the four friends may apply to the court for an order to determine whether or not the property should be sold and the court may make such order as it thinks fit.
Option c: The friends who do not want to sell the property must agree to the wishes of the two friends who do want to sell.
Option d: Any of the four friends may apply to the court for an order to determine whether or not the property should be sold, but the court cannot determine the application without the consent of all of the registered owners.
Option e: In determining any application for an order to resolve the dispute between the friends, the court does not have to consider the wishes of anyone who is not a trustee of the property.
Option B is correct – any person who is a trustee or has an interest in the property subject to the trust may make an application to the court and the court may make such order as it thinks fit (s14 Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996).
The court must have regard to the various factors in s15, but none must be given greater weight than any others (as a result, option A is wrong).
In addition, the application does not require the consent of the trustees (option D is wrong) and the court should consider the wishes of the beneficiaries (option E is wrong).
Finally, the friends who want to sell do not need to agree with the two that do and so option C is wrong.
Four friends (a chemist, a geologist, a mathematician and an art historian) purchased a property (‘the Property’) for them to live in whilst they studied at university.
The chemist, geologist and mathematician each provided 10% of the purchase price. The art historian contributed the remaining 70% of the purchase price. The Property was transferred to them as beneficial joint tenants in equity.
The geologist struggled financially and was made bankrupt. He was subsequently discharged from bankruptcy. The chemist was killed in a car accident and, in his will, left his interest in the Property to his girlfriend.
Which of the following best describes how the equitable interests in the Property are now held?
Single correct
Option a: The geologist, the mathematician, the girlfriend (10% share each) and the art historian (70% share) hold as tenants in common.
Option b: The geologist holds 10% share as a tenant in common, with the art historian and the mathematician holding the remainder as a joint tenancy, with the art historian holding 60% and the mathematician holding 30%.
Option c: The geologist holds 25% as a tenant in common, with the mathematician and the art historian holding the remaining 75% as joint tenants.
Option d: The geologist and the girlfriend each hold 25% as tenants in common with the mathematician and the art historian holding 50% as joint tenants.
Option e: The geologist holds 10% as a tenant in common, with the mathematician and the art historian holding the remaining 90% as joint tenants.
The correct option is C.
Looking at the facts chronologically:
When the geologist was made bankrupt, this severed the joint tenancy in relation to the geologist. The effect was that the geologist held a tenancy in common for 25% (being proportionate to the number of co-owners – four co-owners and, therefore, the geologist is entitled to 25%). The other three friends continued to hold the remaining 75% as a joint tenancy. Option E is, therefore, wrong.
When the chemist died, he was a joint tenant and the rule of survivorship applied. His will, leaving his interest to his girlfriend, was of no effect. The other joint tenants, the mathematician and the art historian survived him. Options A and D are, therefore, wrong as the girlfriend has no interest in the Property.
Option B is wrong as identifying shares is inconsistent with a joint tenancy. Plus, the maths is wrong in that the geologist holds 25%.
A wife and husband bought their family home 20 years ago. The title was registered and, because they were beneficial joint tenants, there was no restriction in the proprietorship register. The husband died last month and the wife is now selling the house. The husband’s will left all of his estate to the couple’s daughter. The buyer is considering what he needs from the seller’s solicitor in relation to the husband’s death.
View less
Which of the following best describes what the buyer needs?
Response Single correct
Option a: He will need to see the husband’s death certificate and will.
Option B: He will need to see the husband’s death certificate, will and he will require that the daughter is party to the sale.
Option c: He will need to require that the wife appoints a second trustee to join in the sale in order to overreach the daughter’s beneficial interest.
Option d: He will need to see the husband’s death certificate.
Option e: He will need to see the husband’s death certificate, will and he will require that the husband’s personal representatives join in the sale.
Option D is correct.
The wife and husband were joint tenants of both the legal estate and the beneficial interests so, on the husband’s death, both passed by survivorship and the wife became the absolute owner of the house. All that you will need to see is the husband’ss death certificate.
Four students (a chemistry student, an economics student, a geography student and a music student) purchased a property (‘the Property’) for them to live in whilst they studied at university. The chemist, economist and geographer each provided 20% of the purchase price. The musician contributed the remaining 40% of the purchase price. The Property was transferred to them as beneficial joint tenants in equity.
The economist struggled financially and mortgaged his interest in the Property to a bank. He subsequently received a large inheritance and managed to pay off the mortgage.
The chemist was killed in a car accident and, in her will, left her interest in the Property to her sister.
Which of the following best describes how the equitable interests in the Property are now held?
Single correct
Option a: The economist holds 25% as a tenant in common, with the geographer and the musician holding the remaining 75% as joint tenants.
Option b: The economist, the geographer and the sister hold 20% each, with the musician holding 40% as tenants in common.
Option c: The economist and the sister each hold 25% as tenants in common with the geographer and the musician holding 50% as joint tenants.
Option d: The economist holds 20% as a tenant in common, with the geographer and the musician holding the remaining 80% as joint tenants.
Option e: The economist holds 20% as a tenant in common with the musician and the geographer holding a joint tenancy, with the musician holding 50% and the geographer holding 30%.
The correct option is A.
Looking at the facts chronologically:
The transfer of the Property to the co-owners contained an express declaration of trust. The equitable interests were, therefore, held as a joint tenancy at the outset, despite the unequal contributions made by the co-owners. Option A is, therefore, incorrect.
When the economist mortgaged his interest, this severed the joint tenancy in relation to the economist. The effect was that the economist held a tenancy in common for 25% (being proportionate to the number of co-owners – four co-owners and, therefore, the economist is entitled to 25%). The other three students continued to hold the remaining 75% as a joint tenancy. Option D is, therefore, wrong.
When the chemist died she was a joint tenant and the rule of survivorship applied. Her will, leaving her interest to her sister, was of no effect. The other joint tenants, the geographer and the musician survived her. Options B and C are, therefore, wrong as the sister has no interest in the Property.
Option E is incorrect as identifying shares is inconsistent with a joint tenancy. Plus, the maths is wrong in that the economist holds 25%.
