header-logo header-logo

24 June 2010 / Geraldine Morris
Issue: 7423 / Categories: Features , Family
printer mail-detail

Not fit for purpose?

Kernott demonstrates once again that cohabitants deserve better justice. Geraldine Morris explains why

The Court of Appeal decision in Kernott v Jones [2010] All ER (D) 244 (May) has highlighted again that the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 (TOLATA 1996) is like an ill fitting suit for cohabitants, trying to squeeze family breakdown, with all its messiness and uncertainty, into a fundamentally arms-length civil framework.

The facts

Briefly, the facts in Kernott v Jones were as follows:
l The parties met in 1980, they did not marry and had two children. In 1985 they bought a house in joint names for £30,000, with £6,000 funded by the claimant and an interest-only mortgage supported by an endowment policy.
l The defendant gave the claimant £100 per week and from that and her own earnings the claimant paid for housekeeping, mortgage, outgoings and an insurance policy. The defendant built an extension to the property, which increased its value by 50% of the purchase price. In 1993, the parties separated.
l Following separation the claimant paid

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

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Investigations and corporate crime expert joins as partner

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Veteran funds specialist joins investment funds team

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Firm enhances competition practice with London partner hire

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll