Lavelle v Tracy Lavelle & Ors

Lavelle v Tracy Lavelle & Ors

The presumption of advancement was comprehensively rebutted by evidence that George Lavelle purchased the flat for his own use and did not intend to make a gift to Tracy and Craig. The evidence did not support the conclusion that George intended to give away his flat. The judge's findings on intention and the costs order were not open to challenge.

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, Inheritance Tax, Beneficial Ownership, Costs Orders
Equity and Trusts Property Law Presumption of Advancement Resulting Trusts Inheritance Tax Beneficial Ownership 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 applied to the transfer of property from father to daughter
  2. 2 Whether the presumption 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 comprehensively rebutted by evidence that George Lavelle purchased the flat for his own use and did not intend to make a gift to Tracy and Craig. The evidence did not support the conclusion that George intended to give away his flat. The judge's findings on intention and the costs order were not open to challenge.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

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