Implied Trusts of the Home

Question 1

Joint Legal ownership

Pettitt v Pettitt

Answer 1

If the parties have expressly declared exactly what their interests are (e.g. a declaration in the conveyance or a separate declaration of trust), that will be deemed conclusive UNLESS claim of rectification can succeed.

Question 2

s 53 (1b) LPA 25

Answer 2

Declaration of the beneficial interests needs to be evidenced in writing. If not - unenforceable - Gissing v Gissing

Question 3

Gissing v Gissing

Answer 3

If declaration of trust is not evidenced in writing - do not comply with s 53 (1b) LPA 25 it is UNENFORCEABLE

Question 4

Stack v Dowden

Answer 4

Normal presumption will be that interests were held jointly. Can be rebutted if the parties INTENDED the beneficiary interests to be different:
- oral common intention to have different shares
- whole course of conduct indicated that they intended for different shares.
VERY UNUSUAL
The fact that parties financial contributions were unequal would not but itself rebut the presumption.
IMPORTANT: acquisition of the property and parties had kept their finances separate!

Question 5

Jones v Kernott

Answer 5

Parties common intention is not static and fixed at the point of acquisition but can change over time.
Starting point - joint tenants.
presumption can be rebutted by different common intention that will be deducted from their conduct.
If the intention to have different shares is clear - each is entitled to that share which the court consider FAIR

Question 6

Fowler v Barron

Answer 6

Court of Appeal held that a man who had paid the deposit , all the mortgage repayments, and all the bills on the property was unable to rebut the presumption that the beneficial interest was equally split with his partner.

Question 7

Adekunle v Ritchie

Answer 7

Court will look on primary purpose of the acquisition

Question 8

Laskar v Lascar

Answer 8

Property can be bought as an investment rather as a joint home