It is not clear whether the couple are married or cohabitees, but we are told that the property in question is their home and is jointly owned. It is possible that when it was transferred to them that an express declaration of trust was included in the transfer to the effect that they were to held upon trust for themselves as beneficial joint tenants or, alternatively, as tenants in common in some agreed shares which need not be equal. If there was an express declaration of trust, it would be conclusive of their interests. If it provided that

We have assumed that the children of A and B are executors of B's estate/trustees of B's Will trust and attorneys for A under a registered lasting

The courts in England and Wales have jurisdiction in relation to proceedings for divorce and judicial separation under Council Regulation EC 2201/2003 (commonly called Brussels II bis). Under Article 3 of Council Regulation EC 2201/2003, Brussels II bis, in matters relating to divorce, judicial separation and marriage annulment, jurisdiction lies with the courts of the contracting state in whose territory: • the spouses are habitually resident, or • the spouses were last habitually resident, and one of them still resides there • the respondent is habitually resident • in the event of a joint application, either of the spouses is habitually resident—note that this basis of jurisdiction is not relevant to England and Wales due to the repeal of Part II of the Family Law Act 1996 by

Legal ownership of a property in England and Wales as joint tenants means that each owner owns the indivisible whole and if one dies, the other seamlessly becomes the sole owner (or if there are more than two legal owners, each diminishing number of owners does, until there is only one left). This is known as the doctrine of survivorship. There is no transfer and the interest of the co-owner does not fall into their

The Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act 2013 (M(SSC)A 2013) provides that the marriage of same-sex couples is lawful. M(SSC)A 2013, s 9 provides that the parties to a civil partnership in England and Wales may convert their civil partnership into a marriage. This has the effect of ending the civil partnership, with the marriage being treated as having subsisted from the date the civil partnership was formed. Prior to the coming into force of M(SSC)A 2013, overseas same-sex marriages were recognised in England as civil partnerships, coming under the category of ‘overseas relationships’ in the Civil Partnership Act 2004. However, M(SSC)A 2013, s 10(1) provides that marriage under the law of any country or

Beneficial interest Regarding whether or not there is any argument that any sort of trust has arisen, where property is held in the name of one party only, that person is presumed to be the owner of the entire beneficial interest as well, unless (in the absence of an express declaration of trust) another party can establish an interest under an implied, ie a resulting or ‘common intention’ constructive trust or by the operation of a proprietary estoppel. The party alleging an interest has the burden of proving it. Claims are made under the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees

This Q&A relates to an assured shorthold tenancy (AST) under the Housing Act 1988 (as amended) and assumes that the father has been nominated as lead tenant for the purposes of the tenancy deposit scheme. It also assumes that the tenants are joint tenants and that the tenancy agreement provides for joint and several liability. Finally, this Q&A assumes that the couple

Possession cannot be adverse if it is by the express or implied permission of the true owner. However, note that if the owner has merely stood by and refrained from requiring possession, there is no implied permission. And any permission may expire or be revoked, in which case possession will be adverse after that time. See Practice Note: Establishing adverse possession of land. In any case, the true owner may have practical difficulty producing evidence of the facts in the absence of clear documentation. Note, however, that if the land is registered and 12 years’

A wedding ceremony may create a valid marriage, a void or voidable marriage, or a ‘non-marriage’ (also referred to as a non-qualifying ceremony in Akhter v Khan). The decision of the High Court in Akhter v Khan was overturned by the Court of Appeal, but the summary at paras [7]–[8] of the different types of ‘marriages’ remains useful: ‘If the marriage is valid (either because it has been shown or is presumed to have been conducted in the UK and complied with the necessary laws here or it had been shown or is presumed to have been conducted abroad and complied with the necessary laws there) the husband and wife gain all the benefits that come with the legal status

As to the need to serve the relevant rule is CPR 55.10. As the Q&A suggests, it requires the lender ‘within five days of receiving notification of the date of the hearing by the court’ to send a notice to: • (a) the property addressed to “the tenant or the occupier”, • (b) the housing department of the local authority within which the property is located and • (c) any registered proprietor (other than the claimant) of a registered charge over the property (CPR 55.10(2)) That notice must state that a possession claim has been commenced; the name and address of the parties, together with the full

When A and B enter into a covenant controlling the use of freehold land owned by (or to be transferred to) B for the benefit of land retained or held by A, as a matter of contract it is directly enforceable. Where however either A or B transfers the interest in the respective plots of land, it is only if the rules relevant to the enforceability of freehold covenants in equity are satisfied that the covenant can be enforced. If A (as original covenantee) has transferred the interest in the benefitted land to C, then C can only enforce the covenant if it can be shown that it benefits that land and that the benefit of the covenant has been assigned. This latter requirement will usually occur automatically as a result of section 78 of the Law of Property Act 1925 (LPA 1925). If B

Construction analysis: With the ever present issues of price escalation, availability of materials and the general state of the world, it seems timely to address some of the key issues in dealing with insolvencies in the construction supply chain. Whilst lawyers are often accused of being ‘doomsday preppers’, according to the Insolvency Service the total number of construction firms becoming insolvent in the 12 months to March 2026 was 3,827. This article by Sean Cooley, associate at BCLP, pulls together a crash course list of key issues to consider where there may be insolvency in your construction supply chain through the lens of the employer.