header-logo header-logo

31 January 2008 / Sarah Greer
Issue: 7306 / Categories: Features , Family , Property , Housing
printer mail-detail

Back to the bad old days?

The courts are adopting an inconsistent approach to cohabitee disputes, says Sarah Greer

Once again in recent months the Court of Appeal has been required to grapple with the thorny issue of constructive trust and proprietary estoppel in the context of the family home. Once again, its decision demonstrates the difficulty for the courts in consistently applying well-established legal principles in circumstances where even the parties themselves struggle to identify their intention or expectations with any degree of clarity.

 

JAMES v THOMAS

In James v Thomas s [2007] EWCA Civ 1212, [2007] All ER (D) 373 (Nov), the claimant, Sharon James, claimed that she had acquired a beneficial interest in a property registered in the sole name of her former partner, Peter Thomas. The couple had met after Mr Thomas had acquired the property, known as “The Cottage”. In 1989, Ms James moved into The Cottage, and lived there until the couple separated, some 15 years later, in 2004.

 

From the outset, Ms James began working in Mr Thomas’s agricultural building and

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll