Chhokar v Chhokar
A wife's temporary absence from the home, while in hospital giving birth, did not prevent her from being in actual occupation.
Facts
Mr Chhokar was the sole registered proprietor of the matrimonial home, but his wife had a beneficial interest in it. While she was in hospital giving birth, he sold the house to a friend, Mr Parmar, at an undervalue, intending to defeat her interest. Mr Parmar knew of the plan. When Mrs Chhokar returned from hospital, she found that the locks had been changed. She claimed that her interest bound Mr Parmar.
Legal principle
The Court of Appeal held that Mrs Chhokar's interest was an overriding interest that bound Mr Parmar. Although she was in hospital at the time of the sale, she was still in actual occupation of the house, because her belongings were there and she intended to return, and her absence was only temporary. The court was also unwilling to allow the purchaser, who had colluded in the scheme, to take free of her interest.
Related cases on registered and unregistered land
- Abbey National Building Society v Cann [1991] 1 AC 56
- Baxter v Mannion [2011] EWCA Civ 120, [2011] 1 WLR 1594
- City of London Building Society v Flegg [1988] AC 54
- Ferrishurst Ltd v Wallcite Ltd [1999] Ch 355
- Hodgson v Marks [1971] Ch 892
- Kingsnorth Finance Co Ltd v Tizard [1986] 1 WLR 783
- Link Lending Ltd v Bustard [2010] EWCA Civ 424
- Malory Enterprises Ltd v Cheshire Homes (UK) Ltd [2002] EWCA Civ 151, [2002] Ch 216
Studying land law? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
