Read Stack v Dowden. Note the facts and decisions. Incduing how the Lors view cases mentione earlier . Also read the Law Commission recommendations.
This is a 2007 case. Stack was a man who bought a house with his girlfriend Miss Dowden. It was jointly registered. She paid more money than him. They lived together for 18 years and produced two braces of children.
Miss Dowden had sold a house she previously owned to buy the family home. DUring their liaison they mostly kept their finances separate.
Stack had to move out when their relationshop terminated. Miss Dowden paid for his accomm.
Stackclaimed half the house. He said they must have a sale and they were tnenants in common.
The House of Lords said that Mis Dowden had 65% of the equity and might have had more had she claimed more. There was a constructive trust it was decided. The judges looked at the whole sotuation – money paid and work done to ameliorate the gaffe.
Baroness HHale said the onus is on the person who wiishhes the beneficial ownership to be different from the legal ownership to prove that this is so. They looked at many favotrs. Who paid what for the purchase, what they paid for renoovations, whether they had children etc… why they bouggth the house.
They had separate finances which indicated they did not wish to share the property.
Stack lost his appeal.
a. How should Lord Birdges judgment in Rosste be viewed?
He doubted that Rosset was right at the time. He said it was definitely wrong now.
b. To what extent would the Law Commission recommendations be a radical reform?
They would be a fairly big change, Unmarried couples would have more rights. More accurately the poorer one would be able to get money off the richer one. This would apply if they lived together for a certain period of time or had children
c. How similar are the Law Commissions recommendations to the approach taken by the House of Lords in Stack v Dowden?
Fairly similar but go forther. Baroness Hale is behind biith.
d. How does Lord Neuberger’s approach in Stack differ from that of the majority?
The noble lord says a resulting trust should be used. He was agains tthe court imputing the parites to have believed things.
He believed the appeal should be denied but for different reasons from the others. He said that a court muust not chhange the law so lightly.