Where a person dies intestate, Parts III and IV of the Administration of Estates Act 1925 (AEA 1925) apply to: • all the movable property of the deceased wherever situated, provided the intestate was domiciled in England and Wales, and (Re Collens) • all immovable property of the deceased in England or Wales, whether the deceased was domiciled there or elsewhere For general guidance on the intestacy rules, see Practice Note: Intestacy—summary. Under AEA 1925, s 47 where the residuary estate of an intestate is held on statutory trusts for the issue (children) of the intestate, the trust shall be held: ‘(i)

Landlord’s interest passing to co-owner by survivorship Where two or more people together own real property, they hold it under a trust of land. Where property is held on a trust of land, the legal estate and equitable estate are separate. The legal estate must be held by the co-owners as joint tenants. The beneficial interest in the property can, however, be held by the co-owners either as: • joint tenants, or • tenants in common If the co-owners are joint tenants, each has an indivisible share in the property, where each owns the whole, rather than an identifiable share of the property. The right of survivorship applies so on the death of one joint tenant, the deceased's interest in

Any property passing on the death of the deceased should be included in Schedule IHT405 . If the property is jointly owned, Schedule IHT404 should also be completed. See Practice Note: How to complete Form IHT400, in particular at ‘IHT404 and jointly owned assets’ and ‘IIHT405 and houses, land, buildings and interests in land’. It is assumed that the property was held within the deceased's free estate and

When a bankruptcy order is made against the co-owner of a property, the beneficial joint tenancy is automatically severed and the bankrupt’s estate will vest in the trustee in bankruptcy (TiB) without the need for a conveyance or assignment (see section 306 of the Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986)). This is the case regardless of whether the property was held by the co-owners as joint tenants or tenants in common prior to the bankruptcy order (see Practice Note: Bankruptcy). Once appointed, the TiB’s function is to realise and distribute the bankrupt’s estate including any jointly-owned property. Following the bankruptcy, the TiB files a form J restriction at the Land Registry against the title of the property, recording the TiB’s interest in the property (see Practice Note: Insolvency and co-ownership). The Land Registry will then notify the TiB of any attempted dispositions of the property.

Parties often on the breakdown of a marriage seek to deal informally with their financial assets. While this saves cost and acrimony in terms of financial remedy proceedings, it can give rise to uncertainty and risk due to a lack of formality and/or the prospect of either party making a subsequent financial remedy application. It is therefore always advisable for parties to record their agreement in writing, and to apply to the court for a consent order recording the terms of their agreement and dismissing the right to bring any future claims. In this scenario, the parties agreed that A would pay B a lump

HM Land Registry’s practice guide 9: powers of attorney and registered land provides: ‘Delegation by two or more trustees to a single agent such as an attorney (“collective delegation” under section 11 of the Trustee Act 2000) may be effective for registration purposes, so that a disposition executed by a single attorney on behalf of joint proprietors may be registered. However,

The answer to this question lies in the application of two principles. First, when does the obligation arise to pay the arrears due when a late rent review is settled and the rent has increased? Second, who has the benefit of the tenant’s covenant to pay rent for the relevant time? When does the obligation to pay the arrears arise? Where a rent review is concluded after the review date (as is very common) and the rent has increased, there will be a back payment due reflecting the difference between the sums actually paid as rent and the sum that has now been determined.

In this Q&A we have assumed that the lease is a commercial lease only (ie that there is no separate residential tenancy agreement in place) and that the lease does not specifically prohibit residential use. We have also assumed that all necessary notices etc to terminate the lease have been followed. The correct court forms The claim would fail to be brought under Part 55 of the CPR in the usual way. PD55A para 1.5 simply provides that The claimant must use the appropriate claim form and particulars of claim form set out in Table 1 to Practice Direction 4. Table 1 includes a general

It has been assumed that the freeholder is the tenant’s direct landlord and that the tenancy is not a type that falls outside the scope of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (LTA 1985), eg public sector tenancy or a rent-controlled tenancy. By LTA 1985, s 20B(1), the freeholder must issue a demand within 18 months of the costs having been incurred, failing which the freehold would be statutorily barred from recovering the service charge. If a demand is issued on a later date, the freeholder can only recover these costs where it has previously served a notice pursuant to LTA 1985,

The period for effecting service of a divorce application out of the jurisdiction is prescribed by the Family Procedure Rules 2010 (FPR 2010), SI 2010/2955, 6.41A, ie before 12 midnight on the day 28 days after the issue of the application. Permission to serve out of the jurisdiction is not required (FPR 2010, SI 2010/2955, 6.41). The two primary methods of service are set out in FPR 2010, SI 2010/2955, 6.41A(3) and FPR 2010, SI 2010/2955, 6.43(3), ie first, through foreign governments, judicial authorities and British Consular authorities under FPR 2010, SI 2010/2955, 6.45 and, secondly, by any method permitted by the law of the country in which the application is to be served. It is possible to apply for an extension of the 28-day period under FPR 2010, SI

We have assumed that the long leases are registered on the freehold title for the purposes of this Q&A. In this case the freehold interest in the land is subject to long residential leases which are registered on the freehold title and which will each be a separate registered leasehold title. The question is whether the freehold owner can charge the freehold interest without seeking and obtaining the consent of the leaseholder. The Q&A specifically refers to a re-mortgage of the freehold interest but in reality, the same issues would arise if the freehold interest had been previously unencumbered and the freehold owner wished to raise money secured

This Q&A assumes that the person who has died was one of the registered proprietors of the freehold interest. It is possible of course that the identity of the registered proprietors, those who hold the legal interests, on the one hand and those who own the beneficial interests is not the same. In many domestic contexts the registered proprietors hold the beneficial interests on trust for themselves, either as joint tenants or tenants in common. This will not always be the case and it is quite possible that A and B hold on trust for C and D. The assumption is important because the register is only concerned with ownership of legal interests. The beneficial interests, although capable of protection either by way of restrictions which limit the power to deal with the title