Khan & Ors v Khan [2024] EWHC 2491 (Ch) (04 October 2024)

Khan & Ors v Khan [2024] EWHC 2491 (Ch) (04 October 2024)

The court found that the properties were acquired and held under a common family understanding, directed by the late Mr Khan, that 7 Essex Grove was for the daughters and the other three properties for the sons, subject to Mr Khan's rights during his lifetime. The evidence, including written communications and conduct, established both an express trust (for 7 Essex Grove) and constructive trusts (for the other properties). It would be unconscionable for the defendant to assert sole beneficial ownership. The requirements of s.53(1)(b) were satisfied by the defendant's 2013 email. Detrimental reliance was established for some claimants. The defendant's counterclaim failed.

Citation
[2024] EWHC 2491 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Ahmed Khan; Claimant: Sarwar Khan; Claimant: Shalima Khan; Claimant: Farhana Khan; Claimant: Jennifer Khan; Defendant: Muhammed Iftekhar Khan
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Chancery Division Property, Trusts and Probate / Final Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claim allowed in substantial part; properties declared held on trust as claimed; counterclaim dismissed.
Legal Topics
Constructive Trusts, Express Trusts, Beneficial Ownership, Family Property Disputes, Section 53(1)(b) Law of Property Act 1925
Equity and Trusts Property Law Constructive Trusts Express Trusts Beneficial Ownership Family Property Disputes Section 53(1)(b) Law of Property Act 1925

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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ahmed Khan

Claimant

Sarwar Khan

Claimant

Shalima Khan

Claimant

Farhana Khan

Claimant

Jennifer Khan

Claimant

Muhammed Iftekhar Khan

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Chancery Division Property, Trusts and Probate / Final Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the properties are held on express or constructive trust for the claimants
  2. 2 Whether there was a common intention and/or detrimental reliance sufficient to found a constructive trust
  3. 3 Whether an express trust was manifested in writing for 7 Essex Grove

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the properties were acquired and held under a common family understanding, directed by the late Mr Khan, that 7 Essex Grove was for the daughters and the other three properties for the sons, subject to Mr Khan's rights during his lifetime. The evidence, including written communications and conduct, established both an express trust (for 7 Essex Grove) and constructive trusts (for the other properties). It would be unconscionable for the defendant to assert sole beneficial ownership. The requirements of s.53(1)(b) were satisfied by the defendant's 2013 email. Detrimental reliance was established for some claimants. The defendant's counterclaim failed.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed in substantial part; properties declared held on trust as claimed; counterclaim dismissed.

Orders

  • 7 Essex Grove declared held on trust for Farhana, Shalima, and Jennifer Khan in equal shares, subject to Mrs Khan's rights during her lifetime.
  • 14 Stapleton Road, 53 Norbury Crescent, and 5 Ullswater Road declared held on trust for Ahmed, Sarwar, and Muhammed Iftekhar Khan in equal shares, subject to Mrs Khan's rights during her lifetime.