Featured Quizzes
User Quizzes
Create Quiz
Data and Charts
Word Search
Badges and Games
About JetPunk
Message Board
Dark Mode
Equity: Resulting and Common Intention Constructive Trust Cases - Statistics
General Stats
- This quiz has been taken 0 times
- The average score is 0 of 15
Answer Stats
| Hint | Answer | % Correct |
|---|---|---|
| Remortgaged house to pay off business debts, amounted to 25% of net equity in property (had 50% total) | Barnes v Philips [2015] | 0%
|
| Mother and son were tenants in common. Could not divide shares until sold. Entitled to live concurrently and neither could kick the other out. (Couldn't sell without property due to lack of receipt for proceeds). | Bull v Bull [1955] | 0%
|
| Couple cohabits property in the sole name, other can only obtain a beneficial interest in property by making financial contribution to purchase of the property or mortgage. (Outdated post Stack v Dowden) | Burns v Burns [1984] | 0%
|
| Objective intention to grant a beneficial interest in a family home can be inferred from a false excuse despite opposing subjective intent. Had children together then man left. | Eves v Eves [1975] | 0%
|
| Financial and family contributions amounted to 25% equity. However, years of abuse endured did NOT entitle to equal shares. | Graham-York v York [2015] | 0%
|
| Excuses to not put name on title can amount to expression of intention to share interests in some circumstances. | Grant v Edwards [1986] | 0%
|
| If impossible to prove or infer parties intentions, court will impute what is fair according to the parties' conduct. | Jones v Kernott [2012] | 0%
|
| Presumption of joint tenancy by CICT does not apply to commercial or investment properties. | Laskar v Laskar [2008] | 0%
|
| Wife paid considerable inheritance money to mortgage. Granted she had 50% beneficial title. | Le Foe v Le Foe [2001] | 0%
|
| Established express and inferred intention | Lloyds Bank v Rosset [1991] | 0%
|
| Bank sought possession. Entitled to 50% interest. Contributed to most bills and substantial decorations. | Midland Bank v Cooke [1995] | 0%
|
| Where there is no evidence of express or inferred intention, court will look at conduct during whole course of dealing. | Oxley v Hiscock [2004] | 0%
|
| Decorations to property does not entitle one to beneficial interest. Seen as a gift. | Pettit v Pettit [1969] | 0%
|
| No discussion of intention, resulting trust used. (Outdated post Stack v Dowden) | Springette v Defoe [1992] | 0%
|
| Common Intention Constructive Trust approach used for unwed couples. Baroness Hale's factors help determine distribution. Rebutted presumption that joint tenancy in law also meant the same in equity. | Stack v Dowden [2007] | 0%
|
No matching quizzes found
Score Distribution
Percent of People with Each Score
Percentile by Number Answered
Your Score History
You have not taken this quiz
New and Popular