Joint ownership: Common intention and detriment

Mark Pawlowski provides an update on whether detriment is a necessary requirement in joint ownership cases involving the family home The deal was sufficient to establish the common intention and the common intention was sufficient to establish the constructive trust. There has been considerable debate as to whether a claimant seeking to establish an enlarged …
This post is only available to members.

Detrimental reliance: An unwelcome development

Oliver Foy explains why the reasoning in Hudson v Hathway is both wrong and undesirable in the context of common intention constructive trusts Common intention on its own does not justify a trust. Something more is needed to obviate s53(1)(b) of the Law of Property Act 1925 and bestow the beneficiary with a beneficial interest. …
This post is only available to members.

Common intention constructive trusts: An agreement unravels

Professor Sukhninder Panesar considers a case where the court was required to consider whether a common intention construction trust arose on a transfer of property that was made under mistake Having established that the defendant did not have an interest under a common intention constructive trust, the question was what relief the court would grant …
This post is only available to members.

Joint ownership: Common intention and detriment?

Mark Pawlowski considers whether detriment is a necessary requirement in joint ownership cases involving the family home In a joint names caseā€¦ the decision suggests that, once the claimant has established entitlement to a share in equity, the amount of their share may vary, or ambulate, following a change in the common intention without the …
This post is only available to members.