header-logo header-logo

04 May 2007
Issue: 7271 / Categories: Legal News , Public , Property
printer mail-detail

Cohabitees miss out on equal shares

The presumption in law that cohabiting partners buying property in joint names have equal interests in it unless they declare otherwise can be overcome by evidence that their intentions were different, the House of Lords has ruled.

In Stack v Dowden, a couple had lived together for almost 30 years and had four children. The mortgage interest and joint endowment policy premiums of their home were paid by Barry Stack. The mortgage loan was repaid by a series of lump sum capital payments, beginning in 1994, to which Stack contributed £27,000 and Dehra Dowden £38,435. The couple otherwise kept their finances separate.

The Law Lords ruled that Dowden was entitled to 65% of the value of the house. Baroness Hale said that to show that the beneficial ownership of the house was not shared equally, Dowden needed to first show that the common intention when buying the property in joint names was that it should not be shared as beneficial joint tenants.

“In some, perhaps many, cases of real domestic partnership, there would be nothing to indicate that a contrary inference should

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