Booth v Booth & Ors

Booth v Booth & Ors

The appeal was dismissed because the second claim, though raising issues that could have been litigated earlier, did not amount to unjust harassment or unconscionable conduct warranting a strike out as an abuse of process, especially given the stage reached in the litigation. The claim was not barred by laches as there was no evidence of deliberate delay to gain advantage or prejudice to the appellant. The 1992 transfer of the farmhouse and cottages to Lucy Booth was a genuine gift, supported by the presumption of advancement and the evidence, and not a resulting trust for Edward Booth.

Parties
Appellant: Norman Booth; Respondent: Herbert Booth; Respondent: Barbara May Conacher; Respondent: Joan Mary Farmiloe
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
05 February 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment on Preliminary Issues
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Laches, Devastavit, Presumption of Advancement, Resulting Trust, Administration of Estates
Succession Trusts and Estates Civil Procedure Abuse of Process Laches Devastavit Presumption of Advancement Resulting Trust +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 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Norman Booth

Appellant

Herbert Booth

Respondent

Barbara May Conacher

Respondent

Joan Mary Farmiloe

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment on Preliminary Issues

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the second claim was an abuse of process and should be struck out
  2. 2 Whether the claim was barred by laches
  3. 3 Whether the 1992 transfer of the farmhouse and cottages to Lucy Booth was a gift or held on resulting trust

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the second claim, though raising issues that could have been litigated earlier, did not amount to unjust harassment or unconscionable conduct warranting a strike out as an abuse of process, especially given the stage reached in the litigation. The claim was not barred by laches as there was no evidence of deliberate delay to gain advantage or prejudice to the appellant. The 1992 transfer of the farmhouse and cottages to Lucy Booth was a genuine gift, supported by the presumption of advancement and the evidence, and not a resulting trust for Edward Booth.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed. The High Court's findings and orders stand.