Brian Turner v Kim Jacob
Brian Turner v Kim Jacob
- 2006
[2006] EWHC 1317 (Ch), 8 June 2006. Considers whether an occupier of a property contesting the possible granting of a possession order against her could demonstrate circumstances which would make it inequitable or unconscionable to deprive her of some interest in the property. T sought an order for possession of a property occupied by his estranged wife J. J had left the matrimonial home and moved into a property purchased by her mother for her a few days before her mother died. J's mother had however made a new will in which she left the property to T. J claimed that the property was held on a common intention constructive trust which had arisen on or after the purchase of the property. "Held": judgment in favour of T. J's mother had not intended that the property would be a gift to J nor did J ever indicate to her mother that she had that belief or was acting in reliance on it. J had not established circumstances which made it inequitable or unconscionable for her not to be given some interest in the property. The claim to an interest in the property under a resulting trust was not made out.
YAXLEY V GOTTS
JENNINGS V RICE AND OTHERS
TURNER V JACOB
RE HALLETT'S ESTATE
RE OATWAY
HABIB BANK LTD V HABIB BANK AG ZURICH
England and Wales--1543-
[2006] EWHC 1317 (Ch), 8 June 2006. Considers whether an occupier of a property contesting the possible granting of a possession order against her could demonstrate circumstances which would make it inequitable or unconscionable to deprive her of some interest in the property. T sought an order for possession of a property occupied by his estranged wife J. J had left the matrimonial home and moved into a property purchased by her mother for her a few days before her mother died. J's mother had however made a new will in which she left the property to T. J claimed that the property was held on a common intention constructive trust which had arisen on or after the purchase of the property. "Held": judgment in favour of T. J's mother had not intended that the property would be a gift to J nor did J ever indicate to her mother that she had that belief or was acting in reliance on it. J had not established circumstances which made it inequitable or unconscionable for her not to be given some interest in the property. The claim to an interest in the property under a resulting trust was not made out.
YAXLEY V GOTTS
JENNINGS V RICE AND OTHERS
TURNER V JACOB
RE HALLETT'S ESTATE
RE OATWAY
HABIB BANK LTD V HABIB BANK AG ZURICH
England and Wales--1543-