Key Facts
- •Siblings Dudley and Mona Heslop claimed beneficial ownership of a Jamaican house (the Property) against their sister Jennifer Seales.
- •The Property was originally purchased in 2008 in the joint names of their mother, Pearline Albertha Hylton, and Jennifer.
- •Jennifer transferred £100,000 to their mother in late 2007, which was used towards the purchase price.
- •Mrs. Hylton later attempted to sever the joint tenancy, but Jennifer did not cooperate.
- •Dudley was the executor of Mrs. Hylton’s will, which gave each child a 22% share in the Property (Dudley was barred from inheriting under the Will due to witnessing it).
Legal Principles
Equity follows the law; joint tenants are presumed to hold equal shares in equity.
Jones v Kernott [2011] UKSC 53
Presumption of equal shares can be displaced by showing a different common intention at the time of purchase or later.
Jones v Kernott [2011] UKSC 53
Common intention is deduced objectively from conduct; financial contributions are relevant but not the only factor.
Jones v Kernott [2011] UKSC 53
In cases where common intention is unclear, the court considers what is fair.
Jones v Kernott [2011] UKSC 53
These principles apply to property purchases beyond family homes.
Marr v Collie [2017] UKPC 17
A joint tenancy can be severed by alienation of a joint tenant's interest; this doesn't require notice to other joint tenants.
Williams v Hensman (1861)
Upon severance of a joint tenancy, each tenant holds an equal share, regardless of unequal contributions.
Goodman v Gallant [1986] Fam 106
Tracing claim available for funds used without consent; beneficiary can choose between proprietary claim or personal claim.
Foskett v McKeown [2001] 1 A.C. 102
Choice of law for resulting trusts determined by closest connection.
Lightning v Lightning Electrical Contractors, Martin v Secretary of State for Work & Pensions, FS Cairo (Nile Plaza) LLC v Lady Brownlie
Outcomes
Jennifer Seales has a beneficial interest in the Property.
The court found that Jennifer contributed £100,000 to the purchase price, which was held on a bare trust by Mrs. Hylton. Even without explicit consent for its use, Mrs. Hylton's actions demonstrate an intention for Jennifer to have a beneficial interest, further supported by documentary evidence and Mrs. Hylton's own statements. The joint tenancy was severed by Mrs. Hylton's actions in 2012.