Back to the bad old days?

Reviews the Court of Appeal decision in James v Thomas that a cohabitee had not acquired an equitable interest in a property registered in her former partner's sole name through a constructive trust, based on express or inferred common intention, or by proprietary estoppel. Highlights the inconsistent approach of the courts to cohabitee disputes. Outlines the Law Commission's proposals in its 2007 report, Cohabitation: The Financial Consequences of Relationship Breakdown, notes the factors to be taken into account by the courts, and speculates on the case's outcome if the proposals were applied. [From Legal Journals Index]

Property in body parts and products of the human body

An intriguing question, which until recently had not been directly explored by the courts, is the extent to which English law recognises body parts and products of the human body as property capable of ownership. Although the common law currently recognises no general property in a dead body (and only limited possessory rights in respect of it), this apparent “no-property rule” provides no justification, it is submitted, for denying proprietary status to parts or products of a living human body. The recent decision of the Court of Appeal in Yearworth v. North Bristol NHS Trust ([2009] EWCA Civ 37) lends strong support to the view that genetic material (as the product of a living human body) is capable of ownership, at least in the context of a claim in the tort of negligence and bailment. This article examines the various issues by reference to both English and Commonwealth authority.

Resulting trusts, joint borrowers and beneficial share

Reviews case law illustrating the courts' approach to beneficial ownership of property purchased in joint name by means of a joint mortgage but without any declaration of beneficial interest, the resulting trust and joint beneficial interest presumptions. Contrast the approach adopted in cases where one party made no contribution to the mortgage payments with those where both parties made a contribution. Highlights the courts' treatment of the right to buy discount afforded tenant purchasers and property purchased as a commercial venture rather than a home.

Estoppel and the interests of the prospective beneficiary

Reviews case law concerning proprietary and testamentary estoppel. Examines two cases in which an elderly person made certain comments and encouraged an understanding between themselves and the claimants, that on death properties would be left to them, but where the requisite legal formalities were not undertaken. Illustrates the contrasting courts' approach, once estoppel has been established, in finding the appropriate remedy to satisfy and considers the challenges faced by the courts in differentiating between constructive trust and proprietary estoppel. [From Legal Journals Index]