Turner v Jacob

Turner v Jacob

Kim Jacob failed to establish that Mrs Turner intended Clarkfield to be a gift or that there was any agreement or assurance sufficient to found a constructive trust or proprietary estoppel. The evidence showed Mrs Turner intended Kim to pay for Clarkfield, not to receive it as a gift. The tracing claim failed because only a small sum could be traced, and it was not used to purchase Clarkfield. There was no unconscionability or equity arising to entitle Kim Jacob to Clarkfield.

Parties
Claimant / Part 20 Defendant: Brian Turner; Defendant / Part 20 Claimant: Kim Jacob
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 June 2006
Procedural Posture
Chancery Division Civil Claim / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claim for beneficial ownership of Clarkfield dismissed; counterclaim dismissed; order for possession of Clarkfield in favour of Brian Turner; order for return of specified personal chattels to Kim Jacob.
Legal Topics
Constructive Trust, Proprietary Estoppel, Resulting Trust, Tracing, Beneficial Ownership, Wills and Probate
Equity Trusts and Estates Property Law Constructive Trust Proprietary Estoppel Resulting Trust Tracing Beneficial Ownership +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Brian Turner

Claimant / Part 20 Defendant

Kim Jacob

Defendant / Part 20 Claimant

Procedural Posture

Chancery Division Civil Claim / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Kim Jacob is beneficially entitled to Clarkfield under a constructive trust or proprietary estoppel
  2. 2 Whether a resulting trust or tracing claim entitles Kim Jacob to Clarkfield
  3. 3 Whether Mrs Turner intended Clarkfield to be a gift to Kim Jacob

Ratio Decidendi

Kim Jacob failed to establish that Mrs Turner intended Clarkfield to be a gift or that there was any agreement or assurance sufficient to found a constructive trust or proprietary estoppel. The evidence showed Mrs Turner intended Kim to pay for Clarkfield, not to receive it as a gift. The tracing claim failed because only a small sum could be traced, and it was not used to purchase Clarkfield. There was no unconscionability or equity arising to entitle Kim Jacob to Clarkfield.

Court Disposition

Claim for beneficial ownership of Clarkfield dismissed; counterclaim dismissed; order for possession of Clarkfield in favour of Brian Turner; order for return of specified personal chattels to Kim Jacob.

Orders

  • Order for possession of Clarkfield to Brian Turner
  • Order for return of coffee table, conservatory wicker furniture, wicker glass table and chairs, and any dressing tables and mirrors from Glebe Avenue to Kim Jacob