Capehorn v Harris [2015] EWCA Civ 955 (08 July 2015)

Capehorn v Harris [2015] EWCA Civ 955 (08 July 2015)

The judge erred by imputing an intention to the parties at the first stage of the constructive trust analysis rather than identifying an actual agreement. There was no actual agreement that Mr Harris should have a beneficial interest in Sunnyside Farm, 19 Beaumont Road, or the company shares. Therefore, Mr Harris's claim fails, and Mrs Capehorn is the sole legal and beneficial owner of the properties; Mr Harris is the sole owner of the company shares.

Citation
[2015] EWCA Civ 955
Parties
Claimant/applicant: Linda Maureen Capehorn; Defendant/respondent: Michael Benjamin Harris
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 July 2015
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Central London County Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; cross-appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Constructive Trusts, Beneficial Interest, Unmarried Cohabitees, Division of Assets, Implied Terms

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 1 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Linda Maureen Capehorn

Claimant/applicant

Michael Benjamin Harris

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Central London County Court Judgment

  1. 1 Whether Mr Harris had a beneficial interest in Sunnyside Farm or 19 Beaumont Road
  2. 2 Whether Mrs Capehorn had a beneficial interest in shares of LMC Trade Sales Ltd
  3. 3 Whether the judge erred in law by imputing rather than inferring an agreement for beneficial interests

Ratio Decidendi

The judge erred by imputing an intention to the parties at the first stage of the constructive trust analysis rather than identifying an actual agreement. There was no actual agreement that Mr Harris should have a beneficial interest in Sunnyside Farm, 19 Beaumont Road, or the company shares. Therefore, Mr Harris's claim fails, and Mrs Capehorn is the sole legal and beneficial owner of the properties; Mr Harris is the sole owner of the company shares.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; cross-appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Mrs Capehorn's appeal allowed
  • Mr Harris's cross-appeal dismissed