Click the case name for better results:

Van Laethem v Brooker and Another: ChD 12 Jul 2005

The claimant asserted an interest in several properties by virtue of a common intention constructive trust or by proprietary estoppel. The parties had been engaged to be married. Held: ‘A [constructive] trust arises in connection with the acquisition by one party of a legal title to property whenever that party has so conducted himself that … Continue reading Van Laethem v Brooker and Another: ChD 12 Jul 2005

Mortgage Corporation Ltd v Shaire and Another: ChD 25 Feb 2000

The claimant had an equitable charge over the property, and sought a possession order after failures to keep up repayments. The order was sought under the Act, and the claimants asserted that the conditions for the grant of possession were unchanged. Held: Parliament had clearly intended a change. The interests of a chargee ranked alongside … Continue reading Mortgage Corporation Ltd v Shaire and Another: ChD 25 Feb 2000

W v M (TOLATA Proceedings: Anonymity): FD 25 Jun 2012

Proceedings in the Family Division were anonymised after the proceedings had been compromised, even though an earlier application for anonymity had been refused. Judges: Mostyn J Citations: [2012] EWHC 1679 (Fam) Links: Bailii Statutes: Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 14 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – XXX v Camden … Continue reading W v M (TOLATA Proceedings: Anonymity): FD 25 Jun 2012

Miller Smith v Miller Smith: CA 2 Dec 2009

The married couple owned a property as tenants in common. The husband had moved out and, anticipating divorce proceedings, sought an order for the sale of the house citing his inability to sustain the very considerable mortgage payments. The wife said that it was inappropriate to use the 1996 Act when divorce proceedings were anticipated. … Continue reading Miller Smith v Miller Smith: CA 2 Dec 2009

Jones v Kernott: ChD 10 Jul 2009

The couple were unmarried but had bought a property in joint names. Ms Jones had contributed the overwhelming share of the purchase price, and had paid all outgoings after Mr Kernott left several years ago. The County court judge had awarded J 90%, . .

Collier v Tugwell: CA 22 Jan 1999

The parties were joint owners as tenants in common in equity of land. Each appealed orders with regard to its sale, and the division of the proceeds. The parties had bought the property intending to cohabit. They had contributed unevenly, and the . .

Stack v Dowden: CA 13 Jul 2005

The parties purchased a property together. The transfer contained a survivorship restriction but no declaration of the beneficial interests. The judge had held the property to be held as tenants in commn on equal shares.
Held: In a case where . .

Notting Hill Housing Trust v Brackley and Another: CA 24 Apr 2001

One of two joint tenants was able to give a notice to quit a joint periodic tenancy, without first referring to the co-tenant. If this was inappropriate, then it was for Parliament to change the law. Such a notice was not the exercise of a ‘function’ relating to the land within the Act, and accordingly … Continue reading Notting Hill Housing Trust v Brackley and Another: CA 24 Apr 2001

Rossi v Rossi: FD 26 Jun 2006

W sought to challenge transactions entered into by H anticipating ancillary relief proceedings on their divorce. Nicholas Mostyn QC J said: ‘While of course no rigid rule can be expressed for the infinite variety of facts that arise in ancillary relief cases, I would have thought, generally speaking, that it would be very difficult for … Continue reading Rossi v Rossi: FD 26 Jun 2006

DEG-Deutsche Investitions und Entwicklungsgesellschaft mbH v Koshy and Other (No 3); Gwembe Valley Development Co Ltd (in receivership) v Same (No 3): CA 28 Jul 2003

The company sought to recover damages from a director who had acted dishonestly, by concealing a financial interest in a different company which had made loans to the claimant company. He replied that the claim was out of time. At first instance the first defendant had been found dishonest through non-disclosure, and that section 21 … Continue reading DEG-Deutsche Investitions und Entwicklungsgesellschaft mbH v Koshy and Other (No 3); Gwembe Valley Development Co Ltd (in receivership) v Same (No 3): CA 28 Jul 2003

Acts

1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts