Legal News

Co-ownership and occupation rents (Ali v Khatib, Ramzan & Iqbal)

Published on: 25 April 2022
Published by: LexisPSL
  • Co-ownership and occupation rents (Ali v Khatib, Ramzan & Iqbal)
  • What are the practical implications of this case?
  • What was the background?
  • What did the court decide?
  • Case details

Article summary

Private Client analysis: The Court of Appeal upheld an order dismissing a claim for an occupation rent brought by one residuary beneficiary against another. It considered the circumstances in which one may be awarded between co-owners, preferring the approach in Davies v Jackson over that in French v Barcham. It rejected the argument that a trustee in bankruptcy was presumptively entitled to an occupation rent. The starting point in both cases is that no rent is payable. The mere fact one co-owner is in occupation and the other is not is not enough. Something more is needed and the focus should be on the occupying beneficiary’s conduct or circumstances. Even if the threshold for making an award was met, the judge was entitled to take into account, in declining to do so, that the Claimant (C) had been paid more for his share than he would have received had the property been sold earlier. That was so even if the delay was not C’s fault. Written by John Sharples, barrister at St John’s Chambers, Bristol. or take a trial to read the full analysis.

Popular documents