Property Law Case: Juliet's Interest vs. Bank's Claim on Romeo's House

This case study examines the legal issues surrounding Juliet's claim to an interest in Romeo's property, which is being contested by a bank seeking to recover a loan secured against the home. The analysis centers on whether Juliet can establish a constructive trust based on her contributions to the household and Romeo's business. Key legal principles, including common intention and detrimental reliance as established in cases like *Gissing v Gissing* and *Lloyds Bank v Rosset*, are applied to determine the extent of Juliet's potential equitable interest. The conclusion assesses Juliet's likelihood of success in claiming a share of the property, considering the financial and non-financial contributions she made during her relationship with Romeo. Desklib offers more case studies and solutions for law students.

Law
ASSIGNMENT
1

Law
Table of Contents
Issue............................................................................................................................................3
Rule............................................................................................................................................3
Applicability...............................................................................................................................3
Conclusion..................................................................................................................................4
Bibliography...............................................................................................................................5
2

Law
ISSUE
The issue in present case is whether Juliet can claim her interest in the Romeo’s property as
well as whether the same will bind the bank or not.
RULE
Under the English law two fundamental criteria are specified related to conditions of creation
of a constructive trust1. The same are common intention among parties for sharing the
ownership of land concerned along with detrimental dependence.
APPLICABILITY
The decision of present case can be taken through taking into consideration the decision taken
in Gissing v Gissing (1997) AC 886 by House of Lords that constructive trust is obligatory
whenever it is unjust for a legal owner to refute the beneficiary an equitable interest in land.
The decision was held that in case beneficial interest is claimed by a person comprising
spouse for a estate or property on the basis of constructive trust will be accepted only if the
claimant has contributed in the property. In another landmark case Lloyds Bank v Rosset
[1989], it was concluded that substantial amount of contribution is required for claiming the
interest in property2. Thus in present case the contribution made by the wife is £2500 for
decoration of the house and a new cooker. Further, she also worked for three years in the
business from which payments were made for the loan relating to the house.3.
1 Graham Virgo. The Principles of Equity & Trusts. (Oxford university press, 2018).
2 Lloyds Bank plc v Rosset and another (v Mr Rosset and Mrs Rosset) [1990] UKHL 14
3 Andreas Televantos,. "UNCONSCIONABLE BARGAINS, OVERREACHING AND OVERRIDING
INTERESTS." (The Cambridge Law Journal 75.3 2016) Pp 458-462.
3

Law
CONCLUSION
Juliet can claim the interest in the property to the extent of share held after the decision of
court. Though it is minimum to the extent of £2500 invested by her in the property.
4

Law
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Lloyds Bank plc v Rosset and another (v Mr Rosset and Mrs Rosset) [1990] UKHL 14
Televantos A. "UNCONSCIONABLE BARGAINS, OVERREACHING AND
OVERRIDING INTERESTS." (The Cambridge Law Journal 75.3 2016) Pp 458-462.
Virgo G. The Principles of Equity & Trusts. (Oxford university press, 2018).
5