skip navigation

Latest News

  Mortgage Debt Not Regulated by Consumer Credit Act 1974 
  National Trust Membership Rules Out Judge in Planning Dispute 
  Court Provides Resolution to Potential Problem 
  Careless Talk Costs Land 
  Reasonable Depends on Circumstances 
  The Perils of Incautious Auction Purchase 
  Non-Compliance With Court Order Leads to Fine 
  Inaccurate Sale Particulars Lead to Repayment Order 
  Squatters - What to Do Now 
  Council Not Liable for Tree Roots Subsidence 
More...

Conduct Determines Legal Ownership


 

When a property is owned by two people as joint tenants (where the title to the property is owned by each of them, so that if one dies, the other inherits the property by survivorship), each of them is considered to be the legal owner of the property.

A man and woman bought a house in 1992, having used the proceeds of a house they had owned for many years as joint tenants to finance the purchase. They separated in 2001, leaving the man in occupation. The woman and her daughter moved out.

The man issued a notice severing the joint tenancy and sent copy notices to his ex-partner. The effect of this would be to change the ownership to a ‘tenancy in common’, in which each of them would own a 50 per cent share of the house. However, the copy notices were never received by his ex-partner. Later, the man began to suffer from mental incapacity and his daughter was appointed his deputy, to look after his affairs. His ex-partner applied to the Court of Protection for permission to sell the house so that his share could be used to pay for his long-term care, but before this could take place, the man died and his deputy was then appointed the personal representative over his estate.

The question then arose as to whether or not the joint tenancy had been severed. If not, the house would not form part of the man’s estate, but would pass to his ex-partner by survivorship. The personal representative argued that the tenancy had been severed, by virtue of the mutual conduct of the man and his ex-partner. The court disagreed, but concluded that the joint tenancy had been severed by his ex-partner’s application to sell the house and to divide the net proceeds.

What this case shows is that where by their actions people demonstrate a clear intention to sever a joint tenancy (as will normally be the desired outcome on divorce or separation) but the formalities are not completed, the court will look at their conduct overall to determine the correct position.

 
The contents of this article are intended for general information purposes only and shall not be deemed to be, or constitute legal advice. We cannot accept responsibility for any loss as a result of acts or omissions taken in respect of this article.
 
 

Steed & Steed Solicitors, 76-82 & 86 Coggeshall Road, Braintree, Essex, CM7 9BY | Tel: 01376 552828
6 Gainsborough Street, Sudbury, Suffolk CO10 2ET | Tel: 01787 373387

© Steed & Steed Solicitors. All rights reserved. | Legal Disclaimer | Complaints Procedure
Steed & Steed LLP is a Limited Liability Partnership and is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority - No. 508781

Registered in England and Wales under Registered No. OC 343265.
A list of members names is available for inspection at the registered office at 6 Gainsborough Street, Sudbury, Suffolk, CO10 2ET.

Where we use the word Partner or Principal it denotes member of Steed & Steed LLP.

[smaller] Change text size [larger]