header-logo header-logo

23 March 2012
Issue: 7506 / Categories: Case law , Judicial line , In Court
printer mail-detail

Chattels: keep out

Can the court deal with a dispute about division of chattels as part of a claim relating to land under the Trusts of Land etc Act 1996...

Can the court deal with a dispute about division of chattels as part of a claim relating to land under the Trusts of Land etc Act 1996 and, if so, will the dispute be decided applying the same principles as for the land?

The court can most definitely not do so, though if the couple were engaged an application may be made under the Married Women’s Property Act 1882, s 17: Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1970, s 2(2).

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

Sackers—Zak Ullah

Sackers—Zak Ullah

Sackers welcomes new associate

Christy Davies—Birmingham Law Society

Christy Davies—Birmingham Law Society

Ward Hadaway lawyer joins Birmingham Law Society Council

Ellisons—Stephanie Westwood & Anisa Khan

Ellisons—Stephanie Westwood & Anisa Khan

Ellisons expands Chelmsford commercial litigation team with two appointments

NEWS
Businesses incorporating open-source software into commercial products could face obligations to disclose valuable source code, with AI-assisted development making licensing risks harder to track
Careless client checks do not automatically make a solicitor dishonest, but deliberately avoiding confirmation of suspected wrongdoing can cross the line
Construction workers injured in comparable accidents can face sharply different routes to compensation on opposite sides of the Atlantic
Victims of undue influence may have more options than simply unwinding a tainted transaction, with courts able to order profits accounts, compensation and, exceptionally, severance
Disabled people could lose vital safeguards following the Supreme Court’s reversal of the Cheshire West test for deprivation of liberty, two barristers warn
back-to-top-scroll