Misplaced Pages

Re K (decd)

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
English legal case about severance of tenancy

Re K deceased
CourtCourt of Appeal
Full case name In re K deceased
Decided8 May 1985
Citations Ch 180
3 WLR 234
2 All ER 833
Case history
Prior actionAppellant also failed in the High Court before Vinelott J ( Ch 85; 2 WLR 262; 1 All ER 403)
Subsequent actionnone
Court membership
Judges sittingAckner LJ
Griffiths LJ
Browne-Wilkinson LJ
Case opinions
the forfeiture rule unless modified under the Act of 1982 applies in effect to sever the joint tenancy
Keywords
Co-ownership; administration of estates; manslaughter of the testator; forfeiture of beneficiary; statutory modification

Re K Ch 180 is an English land law case of acts of severance of a joint tenancy (one of two forms of co-ownership of land).

Facts

A wife had been suffering severe domestic violence. In one of her husband's uncontrollable rages he had followed her into a room and she picked up a loaded shotgun and took off the safety catch, merely intending to threaten him. Unintentionally she shot and killed her husband. She was charged with murder but convicted of manslaughter instead, and got put on probation. He had bequeathed £1000 to her. His will left her nothing else. The questions were:

  1. Whether she could benefit from survivorship (i.e. was there still a joint tenancy) and to the Will-bequeathed £1000 given the common law forfeiture rule
  2. Whether she would be entitled to relief from forfeiture.

Judgement

Mr Justice John Vinelott held the threat of violence was serious enough for forfeiture. As this pre-dated the manslaughter she stood to lose absolutely his half-share in the property. Although the events were before the passing of the Forfeiture Act 1982, forfeiture was not precluded – for the confiscation the court had . Severance occurs if one beneficiary unlawfully kills another.

Taking into account their conduct and the wife’s financial position it was just for the wife to be relieved from forfeiture.

the forfeiture rule unless modified under the Act of 1982 applies in effect to sever the joint tenancy in the proceeds of sale and in the rents and profits until sale.

On appeal

The Court of Appeal unanimously upheld the decision of Vinelott J.

Cases applied

  • R v Chief National Insurance Comr, Ex parte Connor QB 758
  • Gray v Barr (Prudential Assurance Co Ltd Third Party) 2 QB 554

See also

Sources on co-ownership
Law of Property Act 1925 ss 1(6), 34(2), 36(2) and 184
Trustee Act 1925 s 34(2)
Inheritance Act 1975
Williams v Hensman (1861) 1 J&H 546
Nielson-Jones v Fedden Ch 222
Re Draper’s Conveyance 1 Ch 486
Harris v Goddard 3 All ER 242
Law of Property Act 1925 s 196
Kinch v Bullard 4 All ER 650
Brown v Raindle (1796) 3 Ves 296, 30 ER 998
Re Dennis Ch 80
Burgess v Rawnsley Ch 429
Forfeiture Act 1982 ss 1-2
Re K Ch 180
TLATA 1996 s 7
TLATA 1996 ss 1, 3, 6, 11-15
White v White EWCA Civ 924
Mortgage Corporation v Shaire Ch 743
Insolvency Act 1986 ss 283A and 335A
Re Citro Ch 142
see English land law

References

  1. Section 2 of the Forfeiture Act 1982
  2. ^ "Searching Case Law - ICLR".
Categories: