Jones v Kernott: to infer or to impute, asks Jonathan Fowles
The decision in Jones v Kernott [2010] 3 All ER 423 should invite property practitioners to take stock of developments in the law of common intention trusts. Beneath the surface of Jones v Kernott is a long-running and profound academic debate about the nature and justification of the common intention trust, which seems not to have been resolved by Stack v Dowden [2007] 2 AC 432. It would be inappropriate in an article of this length to attempt to do justice to that debate or to engage with it. This article seeks to place Jones v Kernott in the context of earlier case-law, and to suggest in light of that what the impact of the decision might be.
The issue in Jones v Kernott
An unmarried couple live together in a house registered in their joint names. At no time do they discuss in what shares they own the property. They subsequently separate
-maryam-naaz-theo-corbett-and-rachel-carter-with-(front-from-left)-arya-vindlacheruvu-and-jessica-ashcroft.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=47f89300_1)
