Ownership Occupation And Use Of Land Flashcards
Thompson v Park
Two schools were amalgamated (connected) via licence, under the control of the claimant and defendant headmasters. Following a breakdown in relationship, could the licence be revoked?
Yes
A court will not force people to live under the same roof
Stack v Dowden
Mr Stack, a self-employed builder and decorator and then employee of Hammersmith and Fulham LBC, and Ms Dowden, an electrical engineer with the London Electricity Board, had cohabited for almost 18 years and had four children from 1986 to 1991. They then bought a house in 1993 at 114 Chatsworth Road, Willesden Green, London. It was registered in both their names, but they had not said what their respective shares were on the Land Registry Form. Usually this meant a presumption that they would share equally in the home. However, the purchase was funded by selling a house that was in Ms Dowden’s sole name, her savings and a joint loan, so she had given 65% of the purchase price. Mr Stack had kept his finances separate, but was living in the previous house since 1983 and had done many improvements. They always, or mostly, had had separate bank accounts, savings and investments. Nine years after purchasing the house, their relationship broke down and they agreed a court order that excluded Mr Stack from the house and required Ms Dowden to pay Mr Stack for the cost of his alternative accommodation. Mr Stack then sought a declaration that the house was held upon trust by the couple as tenants in common and an order for its sale.
Held - The High Court declared that they owned the property in equal shares. Ms Dowden appealed.
Appeal - The Court of Appeal overturned the High Court and ordered that the net proceeds be divided 65 per cent to her and 35 per cent to Mr Stack.
Re Drapers Conveyance
A marriage broke down and a summons was made such that an order could be made for the matrimonial home to be sold. The husband died before the hearing. Did this summons effect severance?
Yes
This notice in writing under s 36(2) of the Law of Property Act 1925 had immediate effect and severance was effected
The wife was not entitled to the whole of the estate, as survivorship had not operated due to the lack of a joint tenancy.
