Lavelle v Tracy Lavelle & Ors [2004] EWCA Civ 223 (11 February 2004)

Lavelle v Tracy Lavelle & Ors [2004] EWCA Civ 223 (11 February 2004)

The presumption of advancement was rebutted by evidence that George Lavelle intended to retain the beneficial interest in the flat; the flat was held by Tracy Lavelle on trust for George Lavelle and was not a gift; the costs order made by the judge was within his discretion and not outside the reasonable ambit.

Citation
[2004] EWCA Civ 223
Parties
Claimant/respondent: George Lavelle; Defendant/appellant: Tracy Lavelle; Defendant/appellant: Craig Lavelle; Defendant/appellant: Jacqueline Lavelle; Defendant/appellant: Graham Yeardley
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 February 2004
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (chancery Division) to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Presumption of Advancement, Resulting Trusts, Beneficial Ownership, Inheritance Tax Planning, Costs Orders
Equity and Trusts Property Law Presumption of Advancement Resulting Trusts Beneficial Ownership Inheritance Tax Planning Costs Orders

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

George Lavelle

Claimant/respondent

Tracy Lavelle

Defendant/appellant

Craig Lavelle

Defendant/appellant

Jacqueline Lavelle

Defendant/appellant

Graham Yeardley

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (chancery Division) to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the presumption of advancement applies to the conveyance of property from father to daughter
  2. 2 Whether the presumption of advancement was rebutted by evidence of intention
  3. 3 Whether the flat was held on trust for the claimant or was a gift to the defendants

Ratio Decidendi

The presumption of advancement was rebutted by evidence that George Lavelle intended to retain the beneficial interest in the flat; the flat was held by Tracy Lavelle on trust for George Lavelle and was not a gift; the costs order made by the judge was within his discretion and not outside the reasonable ambit.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Costs to be subject to detailed assessment if not agreed