Intention of joint benefit
Language: English Series: Financial Times ; 4/4/90 p20Publication details: 1990Subject(s): Summary: Lloyds Bank plc v Rosset and another HL 29 March 1990. The House of Lords allowed an appeal by the bank claiming possession of property held in the name of the defendant`s husband as the wife, although able to prove occupation at the time of transfer giving her an interest under Land Registration Act 1925 s70(1)(g) , was unable to prove intention between the husband and herself that he held the house for their joint benefit.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| News article | London News article | WB2614-37 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 29423-1001 |
Lloyds Bank plc v Rosset and another HL 29 March 1990. The House of Lords allowed an appeal by the bank claiming possession of property held in the name of the defendant`s husband as the wife, although able to prove occupation at the time of transfer giving her an interest under Land Registration Act 1925 s70(1)(g) , was unable to prove intention between the husband and herself that he held the house for their joint benefit.