Legal Aspects of Property Management

This article discusses the legal aspects of property management, including rules and principles, equitable interest, trust, estoppel, license, and constructive trust. It also explores the application of these concepts in a case between Paul and George.

Legal Aspects of Property
Management
OCTOBER 17, 2018
xxx (xxx) |xxx | Word Count: 2000

SECTION A
Issue
− Between Paul … Plaintiff And George … Defendant
In this, the main evict is to dislodge somebody from region with the help of
practical notification : Normally it takes time from 1 month to 6 months. In Mehta
v. Royal Bank of Scotland Times 25-Jan-1999, (2000) 32 HLR 45.
For making out the defendant from the home, Plaintiff wants to sue.
In addition, as defendant have the equitable rights, he goes to get a portion of his
share in the respective assests.
The concern is needed to take into consideration that if Paul have the right to
take the house free of George interest:
i. In relation to leaving the home by George
ii. In the property, dies George hold any any interest
iii. Making George out from the property, does George have the ability?
iv. In relation to the more favorable interest, will George will be treated as a
licensee and what will be the related permit will it come upon.
Rules & Principles
S.70(1)(g) of the Land Registration Act, 1925 states that administering the notion
of the main occupation and as an outcome physical control of the property or
proof of physical control of the property.
In the current scenario, Mrs Cann was living on a rental basis but due to her
reputation as a secure tenant, she gets freehold of their property as a below
price. However, Mrs Cann is not capable of buying a house but her son was
ready to buy that house on her behalf. Her son took a loan based on some
assests and thus also promise his mother that he will soon make a roof over her
head. Soon, the property considerately permits to the joint names and Mrs Cann
second husband also started to live jointly in that house. Later on, the house was
sold and in the sole name of the child, another property has been purchased.
PAGE 1

This new acquisition was taken based on partly basis i.e. one part if fulfilled
through the return of the sale and the other part was taken through a mortgage
taken out by the son. In that house, all three are living now but soon her son
started living with a girl with whom he married. Later on, the Son is not capable
and he finds it difficult to pay for the two property and thus she informs Mr and
Mrs Cann that he wants to sell the house and so they have to live in
subsequently smaller house. With the help of Abbey National Building Society,
her son took out a loan as they have found a reasonable property. However, the
bank takes the ownership from him due to his incapability of the payments. This
requires Mrs Cann to establish an overriding interest with her contribution based
on the initial purchase in relation with the reduced provision as per her standing
as protected tenant including the assurance made by her son that he will make a
roof over her head. At the data of entirely, she was in Netherlands for the
vacation, the change of the furnishings was started by her husband and son
including the carpet fitters had gone to the property 35mins before the
occurrence of finishings.
For recognizing the job for the purpose, the applicable time of s70(1)(g) was
when the conclusion date of the trade rather relates to the data of registration.
For constituting the real occupations, the initial action of changing is not sufficient
enough. In Abbey National Building Society v Cann [1990] 1 All ER 1085, [1991]
1 AC 56, [1990] UKHL 3.
i. Equitable interest in occupier where in the title deed, the name does not
appear but the value still contains some respective rights stands on
fairness, justice and good conscience. As per no lawful interest, this is the
position so as to minimize the rigidness of the whole case as per the
mitigation in the law steps. In Williams & Glyn's Bank v Boland [1981] AC
487, [1980] 2 All ER 408, [1980] 3 WLR 138, [1980] UKHL 4.
ii. Trust is an association stands on the course of someone, and here the
individual property is held by at least one individuals relating to various
subjective commitments to use and other welfares can be assured. In the
standard legal wards, trusts exist principally. In addition, the close systems
stand since the time of Caesar. In Westdeutsche Landesbank v
Islington London Borough Council. Times 30-May-1996, [1996] 2 All ER
961, [1996] AC 669, [1996] UKHL 12, [1996] 2 WLR 802, [1996] 5 Bank LR 341.
Considering actualities, in the interest of George, Paul will hold the house
on trust, and it is given that when he is living with Paul, his daughter i.e.
Rose has passed away.
PAGE 2

iii. Estoppel is the norm, which has the standard power to stop someone
from proclaiming something rather than what recommended by a past
action, or articulation of the individual or by a previous related legal
sanction. In Dillwyn V Llewelyn [1862] EWHC Ch J67, [1862] 45 ER 1284,
(1862) 4 De GF & J 517, [1862] EngR 908, (1862) 4 De G F & J 517, (1862) 45 ER
1285.
iv. License in real estate law where one can enter in to the property or use
the property with a respective approval. It is divided into four types,
estoppel permit, contractual permit, license with an interest and
bare/simple license. In Burns v Burns [1984] 1 All ER 244, [1983] EWCA Civ
4, [1984] Ch 317, [1984] 2 WLR 582.
Application
If George wants to claim the interest relating to the paramount Paul’s interest, he
must be in real occupation of the property, to acknowledge that where the above
define legislation and standards are applicable, the contribution on the side of
George needs to be analyzed.
In reality, George money is used by Paul in a direct and indirect manner. For
financing the mortgage of the property directly, Paul uses some of his money and
also to form an extension into the Home for George stay indirectly.
i. Joint tenancy indicates all proprietors holding property name in an
indivisible consequence of all of them holding a total of 100 percent in
shares. It is also called as Right of Survivorship where the interest of the
deceased proprietor inevitably gets shifted to the remaining living owners
at the death of co-owner. In married couples, this arrangement can be
seen usually.
In reality, Paul and Rose marry and as the joint tenancy as the title deeds,
their names have been listed. The 100 percent of the share will be
transferred automatically to the Paul as Rose is expired.
ii. Title deed states as an authorized document or deed creating evidence of
a right mainly to ownership of property.
PAGE 3

In reality, referring to the title deed, the George name was not listed, this
shows that he has not legal interest relating to that house, this is the
condition where equitable interest takes place for him.
iii. Lease is defined as an authoritative record where for a specific time, the
term of an assertion is place for a guy to use another person’s property.
For example, an arrangement where for a specific time period, you accord
to contract (lease) a unit in relation with a specific amount of money every
month. In Facchini v Bryson [1952] 1 TLR 1386.
In reality, we are not informed that whether there is an agreement signed.
It also can not be said that wheher George had paid any monthly rent or
not. We haven't had granted the time of George dwelling in Paul and Rose
and home.
iv. Constructive Trust is defined as an unbiased treatment which seems to
be like a trust related to the court to revenue a party that been illegally
rejected of its right due to either an individual obtaining or holding a valid
property right which they ought not to have as of the biased impedance. In
Gissing v Gissing [1970] 3 WLR 255, [1971] AC 886, [1970] 2 All ER 780, [1970]
UKHL 3.
In reality, George did contribute financially to the property directly and indirectly.
However, it was not clear that whether Paul and Rose give any guarantee to
George. Therefore, it can be assumed that Rose and Paul allows George to
move in because of his deteriorating health. Later on, Paul also requests George
to leave the home due to the death of the Rose. It seems to be a very unethical
way.
v. Contractual License occurs an agreement based on using of the
property and this is attained from an implied or expressed contract. To
make legal relation with anyone of the Offer, Consideration and Intention.
In reality, George contributes to the home directly or indirectly through
donating financially.
With the suspect, the claimant builds a relation who was married at the
time but had disconnected from his wife. As the divorce came, they
manage to unite. A house also was purchased by them which also took
PAGE 4

into his title alone. The reason behind this was related to his age as she
was too young so get a legal title in her name. With the proceeding of his
former home and a mortgage, the purchase price was met. There were
not any direct contribution from the side of claimant but he did various
necessary work like renovation and decoration, concrete breaking and
building the lawn for turfing. The also have further child and when the
divorces came through they accept to marry but did not. He then leaves
the claimant for another woman. In Eves v Eves [1975] 1 WLR 1338, [1975] 3
All ER 768, [1975] EWCA Civ 3.
Under a constructive trust, the claimant was entitled to one quarter.
vi. License by the way of estoppels raised by the plan of the doctrine of
proprietary estoppel where a man has proceeded to his own weakness in
reliance on a confirmation by the property-owner that he will get an
interest for the region. The permit of estoppels can be created by any of
these i.e. Reliance, Promise and Detriment.
In reality, it seems that the couple is allowed him to remain in their
property. It can be presumed that the permit by the manner of estoppels is
formed.
v. License with an interest is a significant license that provides an
enthusiasm for place or in person property. The licensor will be our granter
of permit and the grantee will be the licensee. It may tie successors in title
of the licensor.
In reality, the does not seems to be appropriate.
vi. Bare license is the place where such persons enter the property using an
implied or express consent of the proprietor or under circumstances that
would give a superior protection against an action for intrude.
In reality, it does not appear to be applicable.
Conclusion
It can be said that George has a powerful case. On the Paul property, he made
both direct and indirect handouts. The courts have given their final decision to the
best profit of the parties. It can also be said that the George will probably fall
PAGE 5

under Contractual agreement in relation with the ‘clean break’ rule. He will
probably come under Contractual License as he contributes financially to the
house directly or indirectly. If the property were sold, he will most likely get back
his contribution with the interest based on the market rate.
SECTION B
Yes. There will be a distinctive difference if the property was titled in the name of
Rose and Paul as tenants-in-commons and if George was named by Rose as her
sole beneficiary to the house in her will. George and Paul will be called as co-
owners as the tenants-in-common has the no rights of survivorship and thus their
titles will be registered legally into the name deed. Few choices can be applied
by them in the respective selling off the home and get the share divided in the
line with the agreement as for example 50-50. In addition, the other resolution
can be the pour chase of the property by Paul by taking with George respectively
or vice-versa.
PAGE 6

References
Abbey National Building Society v Cann [1990] ER 1085
Burns v Burns [ 1 9 8 4 ] C H 3 1 7
Dillwyn V Llewelyn [1862] EWHC Ch J67
Eves v Eves [1975] WLR 1338
Facchini v Bryson [1952] TLR 1386
Gissing v Gissing [1971] AC 881
Mehta v Royal Bank of Scotland Plc CA [1997] EWCA Civ 2520
NATIONAL PROVINCIAL BANK LTD V HASTINGS CAR MART LTD; CA [1964]
Westdeutsche Landesbank v Islington London Borough Council [ 1 9 9 6 ] ER 961
Williams & Glyn’s Bank v Boland [1981] AC 487
PAGE 7