Elithorn v Poulter & Ors

Elithorn v Poulter & Ors

The majority (Rimer and Wilson LJJ) held that the trial judge found Madeline Ettlinger had lent Dr Elithorn half the purchase price at the outset, making him a purchaser and entitling him to a beneficial half share in Rose Hill. The judge's conclusion that Dr Elithorn acquired no beneficial interest was insupportable on that finding. The appeal was allowed and the judge's order set aside.

Parties
Appellant/defendant: Dr Alick Cyril Elithorn; Respondent/claimant: Alan Graham Poulter; Respondent/claimant: Anthony Christopher Ettlinger; Respondent/claimant: Michael David Smith
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 December 2008
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Central London County Court to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed (by majority)
Legal Topics
Resulting Trusts, Constructive Trusts, Beneficial Ownership, Presumption of Advancement, Burden of Proof
Equity Trusts Property Law Resulting Trusts Constructive Trusts Beneficial Ownership Presumption of Advancement Burden of Proof

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

Parties

Dr Alick Cyril Elithorn

Appellant/defendant

Alan Graham Poulter

Respondent/claimant

Anthony Christopher Ettlinger

Respondent/claimant

Michael David Smith

Respondent/claimant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Central London County Court to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Dr Elithorn acquired a beneficial interest in 71 Rose Hill, Oxford, upon purchase or only upon repayment of half the purchase price to Madeline Ettlinger
  2. 2 Whether the arrangement between Madeline Ettlinger and Dr Elithorn constituted a loan entitling him to a beneficial share from the outset or a conditional arrangement dependent on actual contribution

Ratio Decidendi

The majority (Rimer and Wilson LJJ) held that the trial judge found Madeline Ettlinger had lent Dr Elithorn half the purchase price at the outset, making him a purchaser and entitling him to a beneficial half share in Rose Hill. The judge's conclusion that Dr Elithorn acquired no beneficial interest was insupportable on that finding. The appeal was allowed and the judge's order set aside.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed (by majority)

Orders

  • Judge's order dated 13 October 2006 set aside
  • Form of further order to be determined after hearing parties