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

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

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll