The decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Jones v Kernott is likely to have far-reaching implications for cohabiting couples and the ownership of property.
Mr Kernott and Ms Jones bought a house in their join names in 1985. They separated in 1993 following which Ms Jones was solely responsible for meeting the mortgage repayments. In 2006 Mr Kernott sought to realise his interest in the property which he claimed was 50%. Ms Jones argued she should be the sole beneficial owner of the property.
No declaration had been made as to who owned what at the time of the purchase. The question arose as to whether the conduct of the parties in the period following their separation was sufficient to change the shares of ownership in the property.
When the matter first came to court, the judge decided that it was and awarded Ms Jones a 90% share. Mr Kernott successfully appealed the decision in 2010 when the Court of Appeal indicated that ownership was equal.
Ms Jones then appealed to the Supreme Court which has now reversed the decision of the Court of Appeal and reverted to the decision of the original judge by awarded Ms Jones a 90% beneficial interest in the property, with Mr Jones having just 10%.
The Supreme Court decision has provided us with guidance on how the courts will approach a dispute of this nature. The starting point is still to consider what the legal ownership of the is (whether in joint names or one party’s sole name). However, whilst there is a presumption that the beneficial shares of ownership should follow the legal documentation, that presumption can be rebutted by evidence that it was not, or ceased to be, the common intention of the parties to hold the property in that way.
Where there is no clear evidence of the parties’ intentions with regard to ownership, the court will seek to infer a common intention by looking at the parties’ conduct and dealings with each other. However, the court will now go even further. In cases where the court is satisfied that the parties had a different intention as to ownership than the legal documentation suggests (either at the outset or subsequently) but there is no evidence to clarify what the shares of ownership should be, the court will determine what those shares are on the basis of what is fair having regard to the whole course of dealings between the parties so far as the property is concerned.
The decision has been hailed as a return to common sense and certainly provides more flexibility when there is a disagreement between couples as to who owns what. However, given that the court will now effectively impose intentions on parties who may well not have had them, does this go too far? Certainly, whilst there is now more flexibility there is certainly increased uncertainty in such cases and it is worth bearing in mind that Ms Jones and Mr Kernott have spent 6 years fighting this case through the court. They are not wealthy individuals and the property itself was of modest value.
The case certainly highlights the need for reform of the legislation to provide us with a clear framework in which to work. Couples should also think very carefully when they purchase a property how they wish to own it and ensure that they are given appropriate advice at the time of purchase. I would also strongly recommend entering into a cohabitation agreement to define the parties’ intentions clearly and concisely. The cost of doing so is a fraction of the costs of bringing court proceedings and will also provide peace of mind.
If you would like more legal advice on cohabitation agreements contact our family law solicitor Altrincham on 0845 0738 445 or email email@example.com
Latest Myers Lister Price Solicitors News
- May 16th, 2013Crowdsourcing – beware of the pitfalls.
- May 16th, 2013Did you know that you do not have to use your insurance company’s choice of solicitor to pursue a personal injury claim?
- May 13th, 2013MLP Injury Lawyers has successfully recovered over £30,000 in injury compensation.
- May 10th, 2013MLP Injury Lawyers has successfully recovered £21,000 in injury compensation…
- May 8th, 2013Great news for Cheshire!
- May 7th, 2013Great result for SEONext
- May 3rd, 2013Employee Shareholders will now become law – Royal Assent is expected today and BIS intends to implement this new, third, type of employment status in autumn 2013.
- May 3rd, 2013Employment Tribunal fees to be introduces later this year…
- May 2nd, 2013Developments on Employee-Owned Companies
- April 29th, 2013Could a franchise be your ideal fresh start?
- April 29th, 2013Are you being treated fairly?
- April 29th, 2013The latest on Employee Shareholder Status
- April 17th, 2013Will a new “employee shareholder” status be introduced?
- April 12th, 2013The Courts Arrive on YouTube
- April 9th, 2013The death of legal aid – there are alternatives.
- April 9th, 2013Not so happy bunny now…
- April 2nd, 2013April fool?
- March 25th, 2013But it’s my name too!
- March 21st, 20132,150 AstraZeneca Job Losses reported at Alderley Park, Cheshire
- March 20th, 2013Pension Pitfalls
- March 20th, 2013Have you been TUPE’d???
- March 15th, 2013Contact a dispute resolution solicitor before agreeing any settlement.
- March 13th, 2013Intellectual property solicitors settle legal dispute for the Fred Perry fashion label.
- March 13th, 2013Council Tax Rise To Hit Beneficiaries Of Estates
- March 12th, 2013Use a commercial solicitor to keep your business compliant.
- March 12th, 2013Cash is King and Europe agrees. The new law comes into effect on 16th March.
- March 11th, 2013TUPE, or not TUPE? That is the question…
- March 11th, 2013Commercial law advice from MLP Solicitors.
- March 8th, 2013Use a commercial agreements solicitor to protect your business.
- March 6th, 2013Business sale solicitors help GN Gaunt become part of a national group.
MLP Solicitors in the news
- November 1st, 2012MLP Rebrand in Manchester Law Society Messenger
- October 23rd, 2012MLP Solicitors launches MediaCity office
- October 22nd, 2012Digital brand blunders
- October 17th, 2012Legal firm launches North West Air Ambulance support fund
- October 16th, 2012How SMEs can Prepare for Pension Reform
- October 15th, 2012A Beginners Guide to Commercial Property Investment
- September 14th, 2012MLP Solicitors Bag New Salford Office at MediaCityUK
- July 6th, 2012Gatekeep: How to pitch to Rachel Chenery at Myers Lister Price (Wealth Manager online)
- July 5th, 2012MLP Solicitors advises on business sale
- June 21st, 2010Personal Injury - Negligence