Woodman v Tracey [2002] EWCA Civ 1335 (10 May 2002)

Woodman v Tracey [2002] EWCA Civ 1335 (10 May 2002)

The judge was entitled to find that Mrs Woodman made a contribution to the acquisition of the property by transferring her and her ex-husband's equity, establishing a common intention for joint beneficial ownership. The constructive trust was made out, and her claim was not defeated by illegality as she did not need to rely on the fraud to succeed. The calculation of the sum due to Mrs Woodman was within the judge's discretion and not open to interference on appeal.

Citation
[2002] EWCA Civ 1335
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Anne Woodman; Defendant/applicant: David Tracey
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 May 2002
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Constructive Trusts, Beneficial Ownership, Illegality in Equity, Co Habitation Property Disputes
Property Law Equity Constructive Trusts Beneficial Ownership Illegality in Equity Co Habitation Property Disputes

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 10
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Anne Woodman

Claimant/respondent

David Tracey

Defendant/applicant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the property at 45 St David's Road was held by Mr Tracey on constructive trust for himself and Mrs Woodman as beneficial joint tenants
  2. 2 Whether Mrs Woodman's claim was defeated by illegality due to fraud on the mortgagee

Ratio Decidendi

The judge was entitled to find that Mrs Woodman made a contribution to the acquisition of the property by transferring her and her ex-husband's equity, establishing a common intention for joint beneficial ownership. The constructive trust was made out, and her claim was not defeated by illegality as she did not need to rely on the fraud to succeed. The calculation of the sum due to Mrs Woodman was within the judge's discretion and not open to interference on appeal.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Stay of order lifted
  • Applicant granted four months from judgment to raise funds to pay respondent