header-logo header-logo

The cost of occupation

15 February 2013 / Geraldine Morris
Issue: 7548 / Categories: Features , LexisPSL
printer mail-detail

Geraldine Morris examines the issues of occupation rent & equitable accounting in cohabitant cases

Most family lawyers have been faced with this question from time-to-time: if one party moves out of a jointly owned property, does the occupying party have to pay rent to the non-occupying party? Occupation rent was considered in-depth in Stack v Dowden [2007] 2 FCR 280 and most recently in Akhtar v Hussain [2012] All ER (D) 225 (Nov). The answer is. unfortunately for the family client who would like more clarity, not clear-cut. 

The issue of the potential payment of an occupation rent arises most frequently in cohabitant cases. Prior to the enactment of the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 (TOLATA 1996) such issues were determined by the equitable principles of “equitable accounting” or “equitable compensation”. In Stack v Dowden Baroness Hale stated that those equitable principles were replaced by TOLATA 1996, ss 12 and 13. However there are references to the principles and pre-TOLATA 1996 case law in subsequent case law and in

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll