Wills & Trusts Law Reports | October 2013 #133In 1971 Michael Walden purchased a property from his grandmother and as part of the agreement she could live in the property for life.
In 1975 he verbally agreed to sell the property to his uncles Dennis and Maurice Walden for £15,000, with £8,000 of the purchase price left outstanding as an interest free loan repayable on the second of Dennis and Maurice to die. This was less than half the property’s actual value. Dennis and Maurice agreed that on their death the house would revert to Michael or his children if he had already died and in the meantime he would pay for all maintena...
Wills & Trusts Law Reports | July/August 2013 #131The claimants were the executors of the late Constance Jenkins (M), and, by representation, the executors of the late Kenneth Jenkins (F). F died on 21 October 1995 and M died on 15 January 2005. The defendants, F and M’s children, disputed the devolution of their parents’ estates and the court’s direction was sought.
F and M had owned a farmhouse and land extending to some 210 acres on the Isle of Wight as beneficial tenants in common (Ashey). F and M owned other land, in some cases jointly and in others cases individually. One such further holding consisted of 26 acres, known as...
Ruth Hughes considers the requirements of actual occupation and the level of involvement in a mortgage grant that will prevent a co-owner from claiming priority over the mortgagee A vivid example of the principle that a person prevented from being at a property against his will can nevertheless be in actual occupation of it is …
Continue reading "Co-Owners In Actual Occupation: High priority"
This post is only available to members.
Christopher Lloyd examines the current approach of the court to proprietary estoppel as indicated in Bradbury v Taylor</em Assurances or promises do not need to be the sole reason for the representee’s conduct: it is sufficient if they are an inducement. The inexorable rise in real property prices over the last half-century means that a …
Continue reading "Proprietary Estoppel: Deal or no deal"
This post is only available to members.
Wills & Trusts Law Reports | March 2013 #127Mrs Clarke was the daughter of Mrs Meadus and Mr R Meadus, who owned a property known as Bonavista as joint tenants. Mr Meadus died in March 1995. Mrs Clarke alleged that prior to his death Mr Meadus expressed that he wanted Bonavista to remain in the family after he and his wife were dead. They wanted Mrs Clarke to live with Mrs Meadus, at Bonavista, for the remainder of her life and she would have Bonavista on Mrs Meadus’s death. Mrs Meadus asked Mrs Clarke and her husband to move in, which they did in September 1995, after allegedly receiving repeated promises that Mrs Meadus would le...
Wills & Trusts Law Reports | January/February 2013 #126William Samuel Taylor (deceased) and his late wife lived in a large property, set in 15 acres of grounds, called Lower Manaton (property), near Callington in Cornwall. The deceased made a will in 1998 by which the defendants, who were his nephew and niece, were to be allowed to occupy the property for seven years after his death, on stated terms and conditions. At the same stage in late 2000 the deceased proposed that the defendants, who lived in Sheffield, should move to Cornwall and occupy part of the property with their two children. The first defendant favoured the idea; the second d...
Wills & Trusts Law Reports | November 2012 #124Frank Edward Suggitt (Frank) died on 25 October 2009 leaving his entire estate (400 acres of farmland and several house) to his daughter Caroline. John, Frank’s son, was left nothing. Frank’s will, executed in 1997, expressed the wish (without creating a trust) that if at any time, in the opinion of Caroline, John showed himself capable of working and managing the farmland, that Caroline would transfer it to John.
The Suggitts had farmed in North Yorkshire for many generations. John was the youngest and only son. He had attended agricultural college at Frank’s expense, but left be...
Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Web OnlyProperty, beneficial ownership
Case No: 1LS72368
Wills & Trusts Law Reports | December 2011 #115F was a farmer. His family had amassed farmland and property, which he owned and farmed. There were three residential properties belonging to F. F had three daughters including C and a son J. J had worked on the farm from childhood and F had paid the fees for J to go to agricultural college. J was also permitted to find employment elsewhere to earn money. At one point J obtained some inheritance, which he used to move away from the farm for a short period until the money ran out. J then returned to the farm where he lived with his girlfriend G and their children. J continued to do some w...
