Bull v Bull [1955]
Share
Bull v Bull [1955] 1 QB 234 is an England land law case concerning constructive trusts arising from join tenancies.
A mother and a son jointly purchased a property. However, the son contributed a greater proportion of the original purchase price and held full legal title to the house. The understanding between the parties was that both would live in the property, with the mother occupying two rooms and the son being the primary user of the rest. A disagreement arose, and the son requested his mother to cease her occupation of the property.
The main issue was whether the mother had the right to continue occupying the house until it was sold. This was based on the argument that she was a tenant in common and, therefore, entitled to have her co-possession of the property recognised. Additionally, the case raised the question of how the law should address ownership in situations where the parties have contributed unequally.
The Court, with Lord Denning presiding, held that the son was holding the property jointly on trust for both his mother and himself. The presumption of sale should not interfere with the mother's right of occupation until the property was sold. The Court recognised the existence of a constructive trust where property is owned by tenants in common, and all tenants are entitled to enjoy the benefits of the property.
Furthermore, the Court considered that ownership generally reflects each party's contributions to the purchase price unless there is a significant factor indicating otherwise. In this case, the unequal contributions did not necessarily determine the beneficial interests, and the legal principle of fairness played a crucial role in the Court's decision. The Court focused on the parties' intentions and the equitable considerations of the situation. The decision in Bull v Bull underscores the flexibility of the law in recognising and enforcing constructive trusts based on the contributions and intentions of the parties involved.
A mother and a son jointly purchased a property. However, the son contributed a greater proportion of the original purchase price and held full legal title to the house. The understanding between the parties was that both would live in the property, with the mother occupying two rooms and the son being the primary user of the rest. A disagreement arose, and the son requested his mother to cease her occupation of the property.
The main issue was whether the mother had the right to continue occupying the house until it was sold. This was based on the argument that she was a tenant in common and, therefore, entitled to have her co-possession of the property recognised. Additionally, the case raised the question of how the law should address ownership in situations where the parties have contributed unequally.
The Court, with Lord Denning presiding, held that the son was holding the property jointly on trust for both his mother and himself. The presumption of sale should not interfere with the mother's right of occupation until the property was sold. The Court recognised the existence of a constructive trust where property is owned by tenants in common, and all tenants are entitled to enjoy the benefits of the property.
Furthermore, the Court considered that ownership generally reflects each party's contributions to the purchase price unless there is a significant factor indicating otherwise. In this case, the unequal contributions did not necessarily determine the beneficial interests, and the legal principle of fairness played a crucial role in the Court's decision. The Court focused on the parties' intentions and the equitable considerations of the situation. The decision in Bull v Bull underscores the flexibility of the law in recognising and enforcing constructive trusts based on the contributions and intentions of the parties involved.
