Beneficial Interest in UK Law

Leading Cases
  • Gissing v Gissing
    • House of Lords
    • 07 Jul 1970

    A resulting, implied or constructive trust—and it is unnecessary for present purposes to distinguish between these three classes of trust—is created by a transaction between the trustee and the cestui qui trust in connection with the acquisition by the trustee of a legal estate in land, whenever the trustee has so conducted himself that it would be inequitable to allow him to deny to the cestui qui trust a beneficial interest in the land acquired.

  • Lloyds Bank Plc v Rosset and Others
    • House of Lords
    • 08 May 1990

    The first and fundamental question which must always be resolved is whether, independently of any inference to be drawn from the conduct of the parties in the course of sharing the house as their home and managing their joint affairs, there has at any time prior to acquisition, or exceptionally at some later date, been any agreement, arrangement or understanding reached between them that the property is to be shared beneficially.

  • Goodman v Gallant
    • Court of Appeal
    • 30 Oct 1985

    In a case where the legal estate in property is conveyed to two or more persons as joint tenants, but neither the conveyance nor any other written document contains any express declaration of trust concerning the beneficial interests in the property (as would be required for an express declaration of this nature by virtue of section 53(1)(b) of the Law of Property Act 1925), the way is open for persons claiming a beneficial interest in it or its proceeds of sale to rely on the doctrine of "resulting, implied or constructive trusts": (see section 53(2) of the Law of Property Act 1925).

  • Oxley v Hiscock
    • Court of Appeal
    • 06 May 2004

    But, in a case where there is no evidence of any discussion between them as to the amount of the share which each was to have – and even in a case where the evidence is that there was no discussion on that point – the question still requires an answer. It must now be accepted that (at least in this Court and below) the answer is that each is entitled to that share which the court considers fair having regard to the whole course of dealing between them in relation to the property.

  • Stack v Dowden
    • House of Lords
    • 25 Abr 2007

    Just as the starting point where there is sole legal ownership is sole beneficial ownership, the starting point where there is joint legal ownership is joint beneficial ownership. The onus is upon the person seeking to show that the beneficial ownership is different from the legal ownership. So in sole ownership cases it is upon the non-owner to show that he has any interest at all. In joint ownership cases, it is upon the joint owner who claims to have other than a joint beneficial interest.

  • Grant v Edwards and Another
    • Court of Appeal
    • 24 Mar 1986

    This requires two matters to be demonstrated: (a) That there was a common intention that both should have a beneficial interest; AND (b) That the claimant has acted to his or her detriment on the basis of that common intention.

  • Bedson v Bedson
    • Court of Appeal
    • 22 Jul 1965

    If afreehold is conveyed to and upon trust for themselves as joint tenants, each has the same beneficial interest in that property as the. If there be two beneficial joint tenants, severance produces a beneficial tenancy in common in two equal shares. and by declaration of the beneficial joint tenancy between and B, their respective rights and titles are no less clearly laid down and established than if there had been a declaration of a beneficial tenancy in common in equal undivided shares.

See all results
Books & Journal Articles
  • Overreaching In Registered Land Law
    • Núm. 69-2, Marzo 2006
    • The Modern Law Review
    Beneficial interests under a trust were not intended to be overriding interests under section 70(1)(g) of the Land Registration Act 1925. The position was altered by Williams & Glyn's Bank Ltd ...
  • Knowledge management needs security too
    • Núm. 36-1, Enero 2006
    • VINE
    • 45-48
    Purpose: This paper proposes that research should be conducted in how to manage the tension between the conflicts of interest between knowledge sharing and knowledge protection. Design/methodology...
  • Collaborative information seeking environments benefiting from holistic ergonomics
    • Núm. 33-3, Septiembre 2015
    • Library Hi Tech
    • 439-459
    Purpose: – The purpose of this paper is to explore the value of utilising a holistic ergonomic approach, covering engineering, cognitive and social perspectives, to cultivate beneficial and product...
  • Understanding co-editing mechanism of wiki-based digital humanities projects
    • Núm. 72-2, Abril 2020
    • Aslib Journal of Information Management
    • 199-218
    Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to reveal the co-editing mechanism aiming at content creation, and an entry of online encyclopedia is taken as a case, for the purpose of promoting and enhanci...
See all results
Law Firm Commentaries
See all results