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
New Cafcass guidance on working with children during COVID-19
The Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (Cafcass) has published guidance on working with children during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. The guidance sets out arrangements for...
Remote hearings in family proceedings – how is justice perceived?
The motion for the recent Kingsley Napley debate:  “This House believes remote hearings are not remotely fair” was carried with a fairly balanced 56% in favour and 44% against....
Online event: An update on recovery in the civil, family courts & tribunals
HM Courts and Tribunals Service has announced that it is holding an online event to discuss its recovery plan for the civil, family courts and tribunals, which was published on 9 November 2020...
HM Courts & Tribunals Service confirms 2020 Christmas and new year closure dates
HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) has confirmed the dates over the Christmas and new year period in which Crown Courts, magistrates’ courts,...
Northamptonshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust v AB
The issue in this case concerned AB’s capacity to make specific decisions about treatment relating to her anorexia nervosa. She was 28 years old and had suffered with anorexia since the age of...
View all articles
Authors

PROPERTY: Thomson v Humphrey [2009]

Sep 29, 2018, 17:06 PM
Slug : thomson-v-humphrey-2009
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Jul 9, 2009, 08:27 AM
Article ID : 85865

(Chancery Division; Warren J; 25 June 2009)

The man and woman were in a relationship. After a time the man purchased the property in which the woman was then living with her children. Subsequently the woman moved out of this property, and went to live with the man. The original property was sold and a new property was purchased; the woman and the man cohabited in this new property. Although the man tried to get the woman to sign a 'living together agreement', acknowledging that she had not brought any assets into the relationship, the woman refused to sign any such agreement. When the relationship eventually broke down, the woman asserted a beneficial interest in the property. The question for the court was whether the purchase of the original property meant that the woman was beneficially entitled to the proceeds of sale.

There was a very high burden of proof in such cases, and the evidence relied on by the woman did not establish that she had acquired a beneficial interest in either the original or the new property.

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