Preson & Anor v Preson & Ors [2023] EWHC 1486 (Ch) (16 June 2023)

Preson & Anor v Preson & Ors [2023] EWHC 1486 (Ch) (16 June 2023)

The evidence, particularly contemporaneous solicitor notes, demonstrates the parties' common intention at the time of purchase was for the Farmhouse to be owned by Ivan and Wendy, the Barn by Sean and Janina, and the remainder (Three Fields and Disputed Land, including the Triangle) to be owned in equal shares by all four. The transfer of the Three Fields to Sean and Janina was solely for stamp duty land tax reasons, not to reflect separate beneficial ownership. Claimants contributed equally and relied on this intention to their detriment. A common intention constructive trust exists over the Disputed Land and Three Fields in favour of all four parties equally.

Citation
[2023] EWHC 1486 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Mr Sean Preson; Claimant: Mrs Janina Preson; Defendant: Mr Ivan Preson; Defendant: Mrs Wendy Preson; Defendant (trustee): Mr Ivan Dean Preson; Defendant (trustee): Mrs Suzanne Joan Cooke
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 June 2023
Procedural Posture
Chancery Division Business List / Final Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claim allowed in part; declaration of joint beneficial ownership over Disputed Land and Three Fields in favour of all four parties.
Legal Topics
Common Intention Constructive Trust, Beneficial Ownership, Stamp Duty Land Tax, Partnership Property, Proprietary Estoppel, Unjust Enrichment
Trusts Property Law Equity Common Intention Constructive Trust Beneficial Ownership Stamp Duty Land Tax Partnership Property Proprietary Estoppel +1 more

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 6 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 13
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Sean Preson

Claimant

Mrs Janina Preson

Claimant

Mr Ivan Preson

Defendant

Mrs Wendy Preson

Defendant

Mr Ivan Dean Preson

Defendant (trustee)

Mrs Suzanne Joan Cooke

Defendant (trustee)

Procedural Posture

Chancery Division Business List / Final Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a common intention constructive trust exists over the Disputed Land and Three Fields
  2. 2 Whether the parties agreed to joint beneficial ownership of Springfield Farm
  3. 3 Whether detrimental reliance occurred

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence, particularly contemporaneous solicitor notes, demonstrates the parties' common intention at the time of purchase was for the Farmhouse to be owned by Ivan and Wendy, the Barn by Sean and Janina, and the remainder (Three Fields and Disputed Land, including the Triangle) to be owned in equal shares by all four. The transfer of the Three Fields to Sean and Janina was solely for stamp duty land tax reasons, not to reflect separate beneficial ownership. Claimants contributed equally and relied on this intention to their detriment. A common intention constructive trust exists over the Disputed Land and Three Fields in favour of all four parties equally.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed in part; declaration of joint beneficial ownership over Disputed Land and Three Fields in favour of all four parties.

Orders

  • Declaration that the Disputed Land and Three Fields are held on trust for Ivan, Wendy, Sean, and Janina in equal shares.
  • Parties to agree form of order regarding partnership and trespass claims, which are settled.