Fowler v Barron
A home bought in joint names was owned in equal shares, even though one party paid the whole of the purchase price and mortgage, because the parties' arrangements showed that they intended to share.
Facts
Mr Barron and Miss Fowler lived together with their children in a house bought in their joint names. Mr Barron paid the deposit and the mortgage instalments, and Miss Fowler, who earned less, spent her income on herself, the children and gifts, and paid for some household items. They had made wills leaving their interests in the house to each other. When they separated, Mr Barron claimed that he was the sole beneficial owner, and the judge agreed.
Legal principle
The Court of Appeal held that Miss Fowler was entitled to a half share. Arden LJ said that, applying Stack v Dowden, the parties were joint beneficial owners unless there was evidence of a different intention. The fact that Mr Barron had paid the mortgage did not show that he intended to be the sole owner, because the parties had not kept their finances separate, and their arrangements showed that they intended to pool their resources. Their mutual wills supported an intention to share.
Related cases on trusts of the family home
- Abbott v Abbott [2007] UKPC 53
- Burns v Burns [1984] Ch 317
- Capehorn v Harris [2015] EWCA Civ 955
- Curran v Collins [2015] EWCA Civ 404
- Eves v Eves [1975] 1 WLR 1338
- Geary v Rankine [2012] EWCA Civ 555
- Gissing v Gissing [1971] AC 886
- Grant v Edwards [1986] Ch 638
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.
