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

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll