header-logo header-logo

24 June 2010 / Geraldine Morris
Issue: 7423 / Categories: Features , Family
printer mail-detail

Not fit for purpose?

Kernott demonstrates once again that cohabitants deserve better justice. Geraldine Morris explains why

The Court of Appeal decision in Kernott v Jones [2010] All ER (D) 244 (May) has highlighted again that the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 (TOLATA 1996) is like an ill fitting suit for cohabitants, trying to squeeze family breakdown, with all its messiness and uncertainty, into a fundamentally arms-length civil framework.

The facts

Briefly, the facts in Kernott v Jones were as follows:
l The parties met in 1980, they did not marry and had two children. In 1985 they bought a house in joint names for £30,000, with £6,000 funded by the claimant and an interest-only mortgage supported by an endowment policy.
l The defendant gave the claimant £100 per week and from that and her own earnings the claimant paid for housekeeping, mortgage, outgoings and an insurance policy. The defendant built an extension to the property, which increased its value by 50% of the purchase price. In 1993, the parties separated.
l Following separation the claimant paid

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

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
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
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll