Topic 4 - Family Homes

Question 1

What roles do implied trusts and proprietary estoppel play in family home disputes?

Answer 1

They help resolve disputes over beneficial ownership of the family home.

Question 2

What are the two broad circumstances that lead to disputes over the family home?

Answer 2

• Relationship breakdown
• Death of one party

Question 3

What discretion does the court have under the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 or Civil Partnership Act 2004?

Answer 3

To allocate ownership fairly between the parties.

Question 4

Is there such a thing as a ‘common law’ marriage?

Answer 4

No, there are no equivalent statutory provisions for cohabitees.

Question 5

What happens if a claim is made by a third party regarding the family home?

Answer 5

The statutory provisions do not apply.

Question 6

Who is considered the legal owner of the property?

Answer 6

The person registered as legal owner at the Land Registry.

Question 7

What happens if the property is registered in the sole name of one party?

Answer 7

At law, the property will belong to that party.

Question 8

How is property owned if registered in joint names?

Answer 8

The couple will own the property as legal joint tenants.

Question 9

What are the ways legal title can be held?

Answer 9

• Sole legal owner
• Joint tenants

Question 10

What types of equitable ownership can legal title holders have?

Answer 10

• Full legal and beneficial owner
• On trust for a sole beneficiary
• On trust for more than one beneficiary as joint tenants
• On trust for more than one beneficiary as tenants in common in equal shares
• On trust for more than one beneficiary as tenants in common in unequal shares

Question 11

What problem arises if the legal title does not represent the beneficial ownership?

Answer 11

Disputes over the home can occur.

Question 12

What is an express trust?

Answer 12

A declaration by legal owners regarding beneficial ownership.

Question 13

What is required for an express trust to determine beneficial interests?

Answer 13

Written evidence satisfying s 53(1)(b) LPA 1925.

Question 14

What happens if there is no express trust declared?

Answer 14

Implied trusts may be considered to determine beneficial ownership.

Question 15

What is a purchase money resulting trust?

Answer 15

A trust where beneficial ownership reflects respective contributions to the purchase price.

Question 16

What type of trust provides a more flexible mechanism for determining beneficial ownership?

Answer 16

Common intention constructive trusts.

Question 17

What are the two types of intention in common intention constructive trusts?

Answer 17

• Express
• Inferred

Question 18

What is required to establish a beneficial interest under a common intention constructive trust?

Answer 18

• Common intention
• Detrimental reliance

Question 19

What was significant about the case Stack v Dowden?

Answer 19

It involved joint legal owners and advocated for a holistic approach in determining ownership.

Question 20

What is the presumption regarding legal and equitable ownership in joint ownership cases?

Answer 20

Equitable title is presumed to reflect legal title.

Question 21

What two-step process is used in joint legal ownership cases according to Jones v Kernott?

Answer 21

• Rebutting the presumption
• Quantification

Question 22

What factors may indicate shared intention regarding property ownership?

Answer 22

• Advice or discussions
• Reason legal title registered in particular names
• Purpose of acquiring the house
• Nature of the relationship
• Presence of children
• Financing of the house
• Division of household expenses

Question 23

What burden of proof is required to rebut the presumption of joint tenancy?

Answer 23

Strong evidence of a common intention.

Question 24

What must a claimant demonstrate to prove detrimental reliance?

Answer 24

That they acted to their detriment based on a common intention.

Question 25

How is the quantification of interests determined if the presumption is rebutted?

Answer 25

By considering the whole course of conduct.

Question 26

What happens if there is no express agreement on quantification of shares?

Answer 26

The court will impute an intention for 'fair shares'.

Question 27

What is the starting point in family home cases according to Stack v Dowden?

Answer 27

Equity follows the law.

Question 28

What is the starting point for determining beneficial ownership in family homes?

Answer 28

Equity follows the law. A sole legal owner is presumed to be the sole beneficial owner unless there is an enforceable trust.

Question 29

What case established that financial factors carry the greatest weight in determining shares?

Answer 29

Stack v Dowden

Question 30

In Stack v Dowden, what percentage share was awarded to Ms Dowden?

Answer 30

65%

Question 31

What was the relationship duration between Ms Dowden and Mr Stack?

Answer 31

27 years

Question 32

What financial practice did the couple maintain throughout their relationship in Stack v Dowden?

Answer 32

They kept their finances rigidly separate.

Question 33

True or False: In Fowler v Barron, unequal financial contributions were sufficient to rebut the presumption of joint tenancy.

Answer 33

False

Question 34

What did the Court of Appeal conclude in Fowler v Barron regarding financial contributions?

Answer 34

Further evidence is required to rebut the presumption of joint tenancy.

Question 35

In Adekunle v Ritchie, who was the primary beneficiary intended for the property?

Answer 35

The mother

Question 36

What does the term 'ambulatory' refer to in the context of intention in Jones v Kernott?

Answer 36

The common intention of the parties can change over time.

Question 37

What key principle was confirmed in Jones v Kernott regarding the presumption of joint tenancy?

Answer 37

Equity is presumed to follow the law.

Question 38

What evidence can displace the presumption of joint tenancy according to Jones v Kernott?

Answer 38

Evidence that the common intention was different at the time of acquisition or changed later.

Question 39

What was the outcome for Mr Kernott in Jones v Kernott after the relationship ended?

Answer 39

He received a 10% share of the house.

Question 40

Fill in the blank: The starting point for the sole legal ownership is that the ______ is the sole beneficial owner.

Answer 40

sole legal owner

Question 41

What two-step process emerged for establishing interest in sole legal ownership cases?

Answer 41

* Establishing an interest * Quantification

Question 42

What are the two traditional routes to a common intention constructive trust?

Answer 42

* Evidence of an express common intention * Inference of common intention from conduct

Question 43

What is the 'whole course of conduct' approach as stated in Stack v Dowden?

Answer 43

Common intention should be ascertained in light of the entire conduct of the parties.

Question 44

What case indicated that common intention can be inferred from factors beyond financial contributions?

Answer 44

Stack v Dowden

Question 45

In Eves v Eves, what excuse was given for not registering the partner as a legal owner?

Answer 45

She was under 21.

Question 46

What should statements regarding common intention focus on according to pre-Stack case law?

Answer 46

Shared ownership, not merely shared occupation.

Question 47

What did the court conclude in Curran v Collins regarding excuses for not sharing legal ownership?

Answer 47

Excuses should not be readily interpreted as indicating common intention.

Question 48

What precedential case suggested that shares could be determined based on fairness in light of the parties' dealings?

Answer 48

Oxley v Hiscock

Question 49

What is the significance of Lady Hale's non-exhaustive list of factors in determining beneficial ownership?

Answer 49

It provides guidance on assessing common intention in sole legal ownership cases.

Question 50

What is the court's view in cases regarding common intention and ownership of property?

Answer 50

The court views actions as part of parties making their lives together, not referable to common intention regarding property ownership.

Question 51

In which case did the court decline to infer common intention due to family care?

Answer 51

Thomson v Humphrey

Question 52

What was the outcome in Graham-York v York regarding inferred common intention?

Answer 52

The woman was awarded a 25% share in the property despite minimal financial contributions.

Question 53

What type of contributions were suggested to be taken into account prior to Stack?

Answer 53

Indirect financial contributions such as paying family expenses.

Question 54

In James v Thomas, why was common intention not inferred despite substantial improvements to the property?

Answer 54

The court did not infer common intention despite the woman's heavy labor and job sacrifice.

Question 55

What did Lord Walker and Lady Hale suggest in Stack regarding substantial improvements?

Answer 55

Substantial improvements significantly adding value could create an interest.

Question 56

What was the key factor in Aspden v Elvy for inferring common intention?

Answer 56

Substantial contributions in work and money, amounting to around £65,000-£70,000.

Question 57

What is detrimental reliance in the context of common intention?

Answer 57

Conduct that is otherwise inexplicable, indicating reliance on a common intention.

Question 58

In which case did heavy DIY work amount to detrimental reliance?

Answer 58

Eves v Eves

Question 59

What did the Court of Appeal state in Graham-York v York regarding property rights?

Answer 59

The court is not concerned with redistributive justice unrelated to property acquisition.

Question 60

What is proprietary estoppel?

Answer 60

An equitable doctrine that allows informal acquisition of property rights to prevent unconscionable conduct.

Question 61

What are the two common factual situations for proprietary estoppel claims?

Answer 61

* Acquiescence: A mistakenly believes they have a right in land owned by B * Assurance: B assures A they have a right in B's property

Question 62

What did the court hold in Pascoe v Turner regarding proprietary estoppel?

Answer 62

The claimant was entitled to the house due to reliance on the assurance that it was hers.

Question 63

What did the court decide in Greasley v Cooke about proprietary estoppel?

Answer 63

The defendant established an equity by working without pay based on assurances received.

Question 64

What are the three main elements of a proprietary estoppel claim?

Answer 64

* An assurance made to the claimant * Reliance by the claimant on the assurance * Detriment to the claimant from reliance

Question 65

What does unconscionability mean in the context of proprietary estoppel?

Answer 65

It refers to the principle that it would be unfair for the defendant to resile from the assurance.

Question 66

What is required for an assurance to qualify in a proprietary estoppel claim?

Answer 66

It must relate to a right in property owned by the defendant.

Question 67

In Thorner v Major, how was the assurance established despite it not being explicit?

Answer 67

It was inferred from indirect statements and the context of their communication.

Question 68

What must be clear for a proprietary estoppel claim regarding assurance?

Answer 68

What Peter said should have been clear enough for David to form a reasonable view that he was to inherit the farm.

Question 69

What is the second element of a proprietary estoppel claim?

Answer 69

Reliance by the claimant on the defendant’s assurance.

Question 70

What must exist between the defendant’s assurance and the claimant’s conduct in a proprietary estoppel claim?

Answer 70

A sufficient link.

Question 71

Does the assurance need to be the sole cause of the claimant's detrimental conduct?

Answer 71

No, it only needs to be a cause.

Question 72

In Taylors Fashions Ltd v Liverpool Victoria Trustees Co Ltd, why was the proprietary estoppel claim rejected?

Answer 72

The claimant would have installed the lift anyway.

Question 73

What was the outcome of the case Wayling v Jones regarding reliance?

Answer 73

The Court of Appeal allowed the claimant’s appeal, finding he relied on D’s assurance.

Question 74

What constitutes detriment in a proprietary estoppel claim?

Answer 74

Detriment to the claimant in consequence of their reliance on the defendant’s assurance.

Question 75

What did Robert Walker LJ state about detriment?

Answer 75

Detriment must be approached as part of a broad inquiry regarding unconscionability.

Question 76

What is an example of a situation where reliance is presumed?

Answer 76

If the claimant acts detrimentally after the assurance, reliance is presumed.

Question 77

What is a common example of detriment?

Answer 77

Expenditure and provision of services without payment.

Question 78

In Southwell, what was the claimant's detriment?

Answer 78

Giving up a secure rented home.

Question 79

What does unconscionability require in a proprietary estoppel claim?

Answer 79

It must be unconscionable for the defendant to dishonour the assurance.

Question 80

What is the significance of the case Sledmore v Dalby?

Answer 80

It illustrates that a claim can fail for lack of unconscionability despite assurance and reliance.

Question 81

What remedies can be awarded in a proprietary estoppel claim?

Answer 81

Transfer ownership, hold property on trust, grant property rights, or pay a sum of money.

Question 82

What principle guides the courts in deciding on a remedy in proprietary estoppel cases?

Answer 82

The remedy should never exceed the claimant’s expectation.

Question 83

In what situations might fulfilment of the expectation not be appropriate as a remedy?

Answer 83

* The defendant no longer owns the property * The assurance was reneged before it was due * Hardship to third parties * Disproportionate to detriment * Enforced cohabitation

Question 84

What was the key finding in the case Guest v Guest regarding remedies?

Answer 84

An award of reversionary interest or sale proceeds was appropriate to satisfy the equity.

Question 85

What does the concept of detriment include beyond financial loss?

Answer 85

Subordination to the defendant and passing up opportunities for a better life.

Question 86

What does a claimant need to prove in relation to the reliance element in proprietary estoppel?

Answer 86

That they acted detrimentally based on the defendant's assurance.