White v White

White v White

The judge correctly applied the statutory criteria under TOLATA 1996, balancing the mother's need for realisation of her capital and the welfare of the children, and did not err in law or principle. Procedural mismanagement did not result in fundamental injustice warranting a retrial.

Parties
Respondent: Deborah White; Appellant: Mark White
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 May 2003
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 (tolata), Children Act 1989, Order for Sale of Jointly Owned Property, Welfare of Children in Property Disputes
Family Law Trusts Law Property Law Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 (tolata) Children Act 1989 Order for Sale of Jointly Owned Property Welfare of Children in Property Disputes

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Deborah White

Respondent

Mark White

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge erred in ordering sale of the family home under TOLATA
  2. 2 Whether the judge failed to consider the welfare of the children adequately
  3. 3 Whether the judge misapplied the statutory criteria under section 15 of TOLATA

Ratio Decidendi

The judge correctly applied the statutory criteria under TOLATA 1996, balancing the mother's need for realisation of her capital and the welfare of the children, and did not err in law or principle. Procedural mismanagement did not result in fundamental injustice warranting a retrial.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed; order for sale of the property stands