header-logo header-logo

24 July 2008 / Sarah Greer
Issue: 7331 / Categories: Features , Property
printer mail-detail

No more nonsense

Separated couples should expect the courts to take a robust approach in quantifying shares in the family home in future. Sarah Greer explains why

The quantification of beneficial interests in the quasi-matrimonial home has been problematic for the courts over many years. Separating couples have often given no thought to the legal implications of their house purchase, and rarely make express provision for the division of the property in the event of a relationship breakdown. Despite the Law Commission's best efforts, legislation designed to assist the parties in dividing up their home now seems unlikely in the near future. In the absence of this, in Stack v Dowden [2007] UKHL 17, [2007] All ER (D) 208 (Apr), the House of Lords helpfully set out guidelines for the courts in approaching such cases. However, subsequent decisions, such as Adekunle v Ritchie (2007) WTLR 1505, have demonstrated the difficulty faced by the lower courts in applying these guidelines. In Fowler v Barron [2008] EWCA Civ 377, [2008] All ER (D) 318 (Apr) the Court of Appeal has at last seized the opportunity to interpret and apply the Stack principles,

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

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll