Spotlight
Family Law Awards 2020
Shortlist announced - time to place your vote!
Court of Protection Practice 2020
'Court of Protection Practice goes from strength to strength, having...
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance Tenth Edition
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance is an authoritative specialist text...
Spotlight
Latest articles
The need for proportionality and the ‘Covid impact’
Simon Wilkinson, Parklane PlowdenThe Covid-19 pandemic has infiltrated every aspect of our lives. Within the courts and tribunals service there has been a plethora of guidance since March 2020 which...
Local authority input into private law proceedings, part II
Mani Singh Basi, Barrister, 4 Paper BuildingsLucy Logan Green, Barrister, 4 Paper BuildingThis article considers the interplay between private and public law proceedings, focusing on the law relating...
Time for change (II)
Lisa Parkinson, Family mediation trainer, co-founder and a Vice-President of the Family Mediators AssociationThe family law community needs to respond to the urgent call for change from the...
How Can I Wed Thee? – Let Me Change the Ways: the Law Commission’s Consultation Paper on ‘Weddings’ Law (2020)
Professor Chris Barton, A Vice-President of the Family Mediators Association, Academic Door Tenant, Regent Chambers, Stoke-on-TrentThis article considers the Paper's 91 Consultation Questions...
Consultation on the proposed transfer of the assessment of all civil legal aid bills of costs to the Legal Aid Agency
The Ministry of Justice has launched a consultation on the proposed transfer from Her Majesty's Courts and Tribunals Service to the Legal Aid Agency of the assessment of all civil legal aid bills of...
View all articles
Authors

PROPERTY: James v Thomas [2007] EWCA Civ 1212

Sep 29, 2018, 17:32 PM
Slug : james-v-thomas-2007-ewca-civ-1212
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Nov 23, 2007, 09:22 AM
Article ID : 88107

(Court of Appeal; Smith and Wilson LJJ and Sir John Chadwick; 23 November 2007)

The judge had been entitled to hold that the assurances on which the woman relied had been insufficient to found a claim based on constructive trust or proprietary estoppel. The true position had been that the woman had worked with the man in the business, and contributed her labour to the improvements to the mans property, because she and the man were making their life together. The woman would be entitled, as a partner in the business, to a share in the partnership assets after taking accounts. Her interest in the property (if any) had to be determined by applying principles of law and equity that (however inadequate to meet the circumstances in which parties live together in the twenty-first century) must now be taken as well established.

Categories :
  • Archive
  • Judgments
Tags :
Authors
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Recommend These Products
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from