Gallarotti v Sebastianelli [2012] EWCA Civ 865 (03 July 2012)
The express agreement for equal shares was conditional on Gallarotti making larger mortgage contributions, which did not occur. The parties' conduct indicated an intention that beneficial ownership should reflect their financial contributions. Therefore, the shares should be 75% to Sebastianelli and 25% to Gallarotti.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2012] EWCA Civ 865
- Parties
- Respondent: Pietro Gallarotti; Appellant: Fabio Sebastianelli
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 03 July 2012
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Appeal From Central London County Court
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed in part; Recorder's finding of equal shares set aside.
- Legal Topics
- Common Intention Constructive Trust, Beneficial Ownership, Co Ownership of Property, Trusts
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Pietro Gallarotti
Respondent
Fabio Sebastianelli
Appellant
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Central London County Court
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the parties were beneficially entitled to the flat in equal shares or in shares reflecting their financial contributions
Ratio Decidendi
The express agreement for equal shares was conditional on Gallarotti making larger mortgage contributions, which did not occur. The parties' conduct indicated an intention that beneficial ownership should reflect their financial contributions. Therefore, the shares should be 75% to Sebastianelli and 25% to Gallarotti.
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed in part; Recorder's finding of equal shares set aside.
Orders
- Declaration that Sebastianelli holds a 75% share and Gallarotti a 25% share in the flat.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment