header-logo header-logo

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

The cost of occupation

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

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll