Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    All I would like to know is whether you would consider this to be an interest under the first category of rosset or the second category?? am really confused as i do not know which one to consider... I think it is the first category as clive satisfies both requirements under this one.... any ideas??


    also in regards to this question how would you quantify this interest?

    Clive and Mary are in love and want to move in together, so, in 1995, they decide to buy a house together. They do not marry. As Clive is only 22 and has only just secured full-time employment, the mortgage company is reluctant to give him a mortgage. Mary is older and has a much better job and so is able to secure a mortgage of £200,000. She is also able to pay £50,000 in cash, whereas Clive can only contribute £5000. Mary has the legal estate in the house, but she and Clive orally agree that they are going to hold the house in equal shares. They do not make any written declaration of trust.

    They live in the house for 10 years, during which Clive pays some of the bills and carries out a renovation project involving redecorating and rewiring the whole house and building an extension. Mary is the main wage earner and repays the mortgage. In the course of their relationship they have three children.

    In 2005, Clive leaves. He has little contact with Mary and the children and makes no financial contribution to the house or the children, leaving Mary to pay for everything. Clive and Mary do not discuss whether his leaving changes how they share the house.

    In 2010, Clive tells Mary that he wants his half share in the house, as they agreed in 1995.

    Advise Mary upon whether Clive has any claim to the house and, if so, the possible size of his share.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by husnain786)
    All I would like to know is whether you would consider this to be an interest under the first category of rosset or the second category?? am really confused as i do not know which one to consider... I think it is the first category as clive satisfies both requirements under this one.... any ideas??


    also in regards to this question how would you quantify this interest?

    Clive and Mary are in love and want to move in together, so, in 1995, they decide to buy a house together. They do not marry. As Clive is only 22 and has only just secured full-time employment, the mortgage company is reluctant to give him a mortgage. Mary is older and has a much better job and so is able to secure a mortgage of £200,000. She is also able to pay £50,000 in cash, whereas Clive can only contribute £5000. Mary has the legal estate in the house, but she and Clive orally agree that they are going to hold the house in equal shares. They do not make any written declaration of trust.

    They live in the house for 10 years, during which Clive pays some of the bills and carries out a renovation project involving redecorating and rewiring the whole house and building an extension. Mary is the main wage earner and repays the mortgage. In the course of their relationship they have three children.

    In 2005, Clive leaves. He has little contact with Mary and the children and makes no financial contribution to the house or the children, leaving Mary to pay for everything. Clive and Mary do not discuss whether his leaving changes how they share the house.

    In 2010, Clive tells Mary that he wants his half share in the house, as they agreed in 1995.

    Advise Mary upon whether Clive has any claim to the house and, if so, the possible size of his share.
    Is this your life story? I bet you're Clive
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thedepressedchild)
    Is this your life story? I bet you're Clive
    this is no my life story! and I am not clive!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by husnain786)
    All I would like to know is whether you would consider this to be an interest under the first category of rosset or the second category?? am really confused as i do not know which one to consider... I think it is the first category as clive satisfies both requirements under this one.... any ideas??


    also in regards to this question how would you quantify this interest?

    Clive and Mary are in love and want to move in together, so, in 1995, they decide to buy a house together. They do not marry. As Clive is only 22 and has only just secured full-time employment, the mortgage company is reluctant to give him a mortgage. Mary is older and has a much better job and so is able to secure a mortgage of £200,000. She is also able to pay £50,000 in cash, whereas Clive can only contribute £5000. Mary has the legal estate in the house, but she and Clive orally agree that they are going to hold the house in equal shares. They do not make any written declaration of trust.

    They live in the house for 10 years, during which Clive pays some of the bills and carries out a renovation project involving redecorating and rewiring the whole house and building an extension. Mary is the main wage earner and repays the mortgage. In the course of their relationship they have three children.

    In 2005, Clive leaves. He has little contact with Mary and the children and makes no financial contribution to the house or the children, leaving Mary to pay for everything. Clive and Mary do not discuss whether his leaving changes how they share the house.

    In 2010, Clive tells Mary that he wants his half share in the house, as they agreed in 1995.

    Advise Mary upon whether Clive has any claim to the house and, if so, the possible size of his share.
    To start with, what is the baseline presumption with regard to beneficial interest when one person holds legal title, but another person contributes money towards the purchase price? You really need to consider express, resulting, and constructive trusts. What are the elements of each? Think about Pettitt v Pettitt, Gissing v Gissing, and especially about Stack v Dowden.

    What are the interests which are not overreached in a registrable disposition for value? Look at Sch 3 of the LRA 2002. Does Clive have an interest which cannot be overreached?

    I don't really think Lloyd's Bank v Rosset is relevant here--Clive is patently not in actual occupation. (The other principle in Rosset, to which I think you referred, dealt with whether a shared domestic existence without an agreement constituted actual intent for the wife to have a beneficial interest. This is not in point here, as there is an oral agreement to hold the house in equal shares.)

    Edit: Not to kick up a fuss, but why on *earth* has this been negged?
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    I *think* the Rosset test may be relevant actually. Because Lord Bridge said to find if there is an interest, you have to look at any expressed evidence, no matter how imperfectly remembered - so Clive and Mary orally agreeing to have equal shares would be an example of this. He said if there was no expression, then you look at direct financial contribution.

    As for having a share of the house, consider if there is a trust. Is it express or implied?
    If it's implied, is it resulting or constructive?
    The Rosset principle can also be used if you conclude that there is a constructive trust (as resulting trusts are quantified based on how much you contributed to the house price) to find the quantification.

    Hope that helps - sorry it's a bit muddled
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Did TEF Bronze Award affect your UCAS choices?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.