Thompson v Hurst

Thompson v Hurst

The appeal was dismissed because the property was purchased in the respondent's sole name, and there was no legal basis for presuming equal beneficial ownership. The District Judge correctly applied the principles of constructive trust and fairness, considering the parties' contributions and course of dealing, and was not plainly wrong or in error of principle in awarding the appellant a 10% beneficial interest.

Parties
Appellant: Thompson; Respondent: Hurst
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 March 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Beneficial Interest, Constructive Trust, Cohabitation, Apportionment of Shares

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Thompson

Appellant

Hurst

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the appellant is entitled to a greater beneficial interest in the property than awarded by the District Judge
  2. 2 Whether the District Judge erred in law in quantifying the appellant's beneficial interest
  3. 3 Whether principles in Stack v Dowden and Jones v Kernott were properly applied

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the property was purchased in the respondent's sole name, and there was no legal basis for presuming equal beneficial ownership. The District Judge correctly applied the principles of constructive trust and fairness, considering the parties' contributions and course of dealing, and was not plainly wrong or in error of principle in awarding the appellant a 10% beneficial interest.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed; District Judge's order stands