Land Law (JTs)

Watch this thread
Andachiel
Badges: 0
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#1
Report Thread starter 8 years ago
#1
Hi All,

Guys i have a question.

House left to A,B as a Joint Tenancy where B is under age of 18. So the legal title is vest in A and B posses only equitable interest in it.

My question can B atomaticaly get the legal title to the property after becoming 18 ?
As in the JTs we are dealing with trust of land so can we presume that A hold 50% share for B ?

Can someone explain me that ?

Thanks.
0
reply
Forum User
Badges: 19
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#2
Report 8 years ago
#2
The legal title can't vest in someone new without a grant by deed and registration, that is the effect of s 52 lpa and s 27 lra.

a doesn't hold a 50% share for b. you are mixing up jts and tics. Jts have no 'shares'. A simply holds for a and b as joint tenants.

Nothing will happen when b turns 18. A will still hold for a and b as joint tenants.
1
reply
Andachiel
Badges: 0
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#3
Report Thread starter 8 years ago
#3
So is that mean that after turning to 18, B have to ask A to transfer the title to him by deed and then register it ? If not B posses only equitable and beneficial interest in the property ? Or make an order under s.14 of TOLATA if trustees refuse to grand a transfer ?

I am curious becouse the JTs is treat as a whole but the house is left to the A(adult) and B(minor), B is disadventage becouse of the hardship in getting the tittle to land not only the equitable and beneficial interest.
0
reply
Forum User
Badges: 19
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#4
Report 8 years ago
#4
It's not that much of a disadvantage because when the house was left to A and B as joint tenants the registrar will have entered a s. 40 restriction on the register. So A won't be able to sell over B's head, even if B is not in occupation.

I don't know if A's refusal to convey to A and B jointly would in itself justify a sale under s 14 TOLATA. It might also depend why the property was conveyed to A and B in the first place - was it to be a family home, are they two strangers who hate each other but C wanted to leave them a house in a will so that they could sell it later, etc? See the factors in s 15 TOLATA.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

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.

Personalise

How did your AQA A-level Psychology Paper 1 go?

Loved the paper - Feeling positive (235)
42.04%
The paper was reasonable (237)
42.4%
Not feeling great about that exam... (51)
9.12%
It was TERRIBLE (36)
6.44%

Watched Threads

View All