Tweet
If anyone is familiar with the Stack V Dowden case - para 86.
Are we to understand from this that the judge was wrong to form his conclusion in this manner? I sometimes find it confusing to get my head around 'legal speak' - anyone out there help simplify it for me?!
"The starting point is that it is for Ms Dowden to show that the common intention, when taking a conveyance of the house into their
joint names or thereafter, was that they should hold the property
otherwise than as beneficial joint tenants. Unfortunately, we lack precise
findings on many of the factors relevant to answering that question,
because the judge addressed himself to “looking at the parties’ entire
course of conduct together”. He looked at their relationship rather than
the matters which were particularly relevant to their intentions about this
property. He founded his conclusion on the length and nature of their 36
relationship, which he repeatedly referred to as a partnership, despite the
fact that they had maintained separate finances throughout their time
together.....
joint names or thereafter, was that they should hold the property
otherwise than as beneficial joint tenants. Unfortunately, we lack precise
findings on many of the factors relevant to answering that question,
because the judge addressed himself to “looking at the parties’ entire
course of conduct together”. He looked at their relationship rather than
the matters which were particularly relevant to their intentions about this
property. He founded his conclusion on the length and nature of their 36
relationship, which he repeatedly referred to as a partnership, despite the
fact that they had maintained separate finances throughout their time
together.....
Comment