Podcast Location:
Download it here [file size: 29.8 MB]
Categories:
Family Law
Property Litigation
CPD Points:
Up to 1 point. details »

Due to the difference in guidelines between the SRA and the Bar Standards Board, CPD points are awarded differently for Solicitors, Barristers and Legal Executives:

Regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority:
Listen and pass the quiz: Gain 1 CPD point (60 minutes)
Listen only, gain ½ a CPD point (30 minutes)

Regulated by the Bar Standards Board:
Listen and pass the quiz: Gain 1 accredited CPD point (60 minutes)

Regulated by ILEX:
Listen and pass the quiz: Gain 1 CPD point (60 minutes)
Listen only, gain ½ a CPD point (30 minutes)

Cost:
  • FREE
Length:
30 minutes of audio
(+ optional 5 minute online quiz)
Plays on Computer:
Yes Downloadable as MP3:    Yes
Contributor(s):
Course Aims:

This podcast is aimed at family and property practitioners, specifically those with an interest in cohabitation rights and the disputes that arise over property following separation. The podcast will explore the Supreme Court’s ruling in Jones v Kernott, addressing the main issues raised in the litigation and how their Lordships dealt with them. The podcast will also explore what implications the decision has for the law on cohabitants’ rights and what lawyers will be able to advise their clients. This podcast focuses on the complex facts forming the background to the dispute in Jones v Kernott. It also begins to explore the concept of ‘imputation’ that features so prominently in the case report and commentary. Where does inference of an intention end and the imputation of a intention begin and what implications does this have? Part 2 will begin to explore more of the practical issues for practitioners involved in cohabitation claims following the Supreme Court’s ruling.

Outcomes:
After completing the course you will:
  • Understand the facts in Jones v Kernott;
  • Understand the likely importance of the findings of a judge at first instance in future claims;
  • Understand the importance of establishing an ‘intention’ in the qualification and quantification stages of a claim and at what point it can be said to change;
  • Understand whether a cohabitant must continue to contribute to a house in order not to lose their beneficial ownership;
  • Understand what steps may be necessary to preserve a party’s beneficial share in a property if they have left the property;
  • Be aware of the conceptual ambiguities of an ‘ambulatory’ constructive trust;
  • Understand what is meant by imputation and when it can be deployed in cohabitation claims;
  • Understand the limitation of imputing an intention which the parties may not have shared.
Level:
Complex Difficulty: 4 of 5
Classification:
Case Update
Legal Principles
Sources and References:
  • Jones v Kernott [2011] UKSC 53;
  • Kernott v Jones [2010] EWCA Civ 578;
  • Stack v Dowden [2007] UKHL 17;
  • Gissing v Gissing [1970] UKHL 3;
  • Pettit v Pettit [1970] AC 777;
  • Lloyds Bank plc v Rosset [1991] 1 AC 10;
  • Jones v Kernott [2011] UKSC 53;
  • Murphy v Gooch [2007] EWCA Civ 603.
Tags:

In this two-part CPDcast mini-series with matrimonial property barrister Michael Horton we explore the conceptual and practical implications of the Supreme Court’s landmark ruling in Jones v Kernott [2011] UKSC 53. This ruling is the latest and highest judicial consideration of the property rights of separated cohabitants following Stack v Dowden in 2007.

Podcast added: 16/01/12

Start this CPDcast Activity

© CPDcast.com