header-logo header-logo

24 July 2008 / Sarah Greer
Issue: 7331 / Categories: Features , Property
printer mail-detail

No more nonsense

Separated couples should expect the courts to take a robust approach in quantifying shares in the family home in future. Sarah Greer explains why

The quantification of beneficial interests in the quasi-matrimonial home has been problematic for the courts over many years. Separating couples have often given no thought to the legal implications of their house purchase, and rarely make express provision for the division of the property in the event of a relationship breakdown. Despite the Law Commission's best efforts, legislation designed to assist the parties in dividing up their home now seems unlikely in the near future. In the absence of this, in Stack v Dowden [2007] UKHL 17, [2007] All ER (D) 208 (Apr), the House of Lords helpfully set out guidelines for the courts in approaching such cases. However, subsequent decisions, such as Adekunle v Ritchie (2007) WTLR 1505, have demonstrated the difficulty faced by the lower courts in applying these guidelines. In Fowler v Barron [2008] EWCA Civ 377, [2008] All ER (D) 318 (Apr) the Court of Appeal has at last seized

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Workplace law firm expands commercial disputes team with senior consultant hire

EIP—Rob Barker

EIP—Rob Barker

IP firm promotes patent attorney to partner

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Banking and restructuring team bolstered by insolvency specialist

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll