Imputed intention and joint ownership - a return to common sense: Jones vs Kernott
Pawlowski, Mark (2012) Imputed intention and joint ownership - a return to common sense: Jones vs Kernott. Conveyancer and Property Lawyer, 76 (2). pp. 149-158. ISSN 0010-8200Full text not available from this repository.
This case note examines the High Court, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court rulings in Jones v Kernott UKSC 53. Apart from critically identifying the various issues raised at all these levels, the commentary argues for a single composite enquiry into determining beneficial entitlement of the family home (in both single and joint ownership cases)focusing on the parties' shared common intentions by reference to an examination of all the relevant circumstances. Such an approach, it is argued, would subsume not only all aspects of the threshold (or acquisition) question including the issue of detriment, but also resolve the question of quantification because the same list of specific factors used to address entitlement would also dictate the extent of the beneficial shares.
|Additional Information:|| This article is a Case Comment.|
|Uncontrolled Keywords:||beneficial interests,co-ownership, fairness, family home, imputation intention, relationship breakdown, unmarried couples, constructive trusts, joint ownership, common intention|
|Subjects:||K Law > KD England and Wales|
|School / Department / Research Groups:||School of Humanities & Social Sciences|
School of Humanities & Social Sciences > (UOA) Law
|Last Modified:||06 Nov 2012 12:39|
Actions (login required)