Drake v Whipp (1996) 1 FLR 826
The plaintiff and the defendant bought an old barn, intending to convert it into a house for their joint occupation. The plaintiff paid 40% of the purchase price and the defendant paid 60%. The defendant subsequently spent a considerable amount on the costs of conversion before the property was finally conveyed to him. When they separated the plaintiff claimed 40% of the sale value on the basis of a resulting trust, but the trial judge took into account the defendant's subsequent contributions and awarded her only 19%.
Held: Allowing the plaintiff's appeal in part, the Court of Appeal said she should have a one-third share. Once a common intention to share the property had been established, the resulting trust was displaced by a constructive trust, and the court could exercise its discretion in deciding what share would be fair.
This study area has been created by our experts to help students with Administrative Law Essay and Problem Questions. If you require further help with your question, why not order a fully customised model answer on which to base your assignment? Use our online order form to submit your request and you could have a complete model answer written to your specification within 24 hours.
