Property rights

Property rights

An application under section 14 of the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 (TOLATA 1996) may be made by a trustee of land, or a beneficiary with an interest in property subject to a trust of land. The court has a broad discretionary range of powers to make orders regarding the exercise of the trustees’ functions, or to the nature and extent of beneficiaries’ interests, including a sale or postponement of sale.

TOLATA 1996, s 15 requires the court to consider:

•
the intention of the trust creator or creators
•
the purposes for which the property subject to the trust is held
•
the welfare of any minor, and
•
the interests of any secured creditor

See Practice Note: Eligibility to apply under TOLATA 1996. The following Precedent letter may be sent by practitioners to their clients: Cohabitant claims under the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996—client guide.

Case law

Beneficial interests are determined and declared under established principles of trust law. The leading case regarding cohabitant disputes is Stack v Dowden [2007] UKHL 17, [2007]

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

TAKE A FREE TRIAL

Latest Family News

MAC publishes family visa financial requirements review

The Migration Advisory Committee (MAC) has published its report on the minimum income requirement (MIR) for the partner migration route recommending that the MIR is not matched to the skilled worker route and making recommendations for different calculations that could be used instead and recommendations to improve the way the MIR is evidenced. This news piece sets out the key points in the report.

Family weekly highlights—5 June 2025

This week's edition of the Family weekly highlights includes analysis of a decision concerning the additional considerations for older intended parents considering international surrogacy. Recent judgments on domestic abuse, applications to set aside return orders and assessment of a solicitor’s conduct where there were issues of client capacity are also included.

Additional considerations for older intended parents considering international surrogacy (Mr and Mrs K v Mr and Mrs Z)

Family analysis: In Mr and Mrs K v Mr and Mrs Z the court considered an application for a parental order by the intended parents, (the applicants), who were both aged 72 at the time of their application. The child had been born via a surrogacy arrangement in California. While all elements of section 54 of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008 (HFEA 2008) criteria had been met, Mrs Justice Knowles expressed her concern, at the first hearing, that the applicant’s statements did not sufficiently detail the arrangements for the child’s care should they die or lose capacity during the child’s minority. The court was required to consider the child’s lifelong welfare interests when deciding whether to make a parental order and was obliged to examine carefully what arrangements had been made to secure the child’s welfare should incapacity or death befall either of the applicants. Natalie Sutherland, partner and head of Modern Families at Burgess Mee Family Law considers the decision.

Family weekly highlights—29 May 2025

This week's edition of the Family weekly highlights includes analysis of the implications of the Family Justice Council guidance on covert recordings in children proceedings. Recent judgments on adoption, anonymisation and an application to vary a transparency order and the Court of Appeal’s consideration of an appeal against a summary return order are also included.