LAWs 205 - 'co-ownership' - 'severence'.

Front

How can course of dealing sever a joint tenancy?

Back

If each co-owners acts as if they had seperate shares in the property, the court may construe this as an intention to sever, even if there is no document, formalising such an agreement.

Front

In which specific case will the courts give effect to severece via course of dealing? What is the authority for this?

Back

In a case where all of the joint tenants are aware of each others intention to sever, and express this awareness by acting like tenants in common, is the only case where the courts will give effect to severence via course of dealing. The authority for this is the case of Williams v Hensman.

Front

What is the general rule regarding a co-owners obligation to pay occupation rent?

Back

Generally, a co-owner is not obligated to pay occupation rent for merely exercising their right of possession alone. In other words, if two co-owners are not exercising their right of possession (by occupying the land for example), they cannot order the third co-owner to pay an occupation rent, for exercising their right of possession, by occupying the land.

Front

What is an exception to the general rule regarding occupation rent?

Back

An exception to the general rule is ouster. This means that if the occupying co-owner completely excludes the other co-owners from the property (by installing new security measures), thereby not respecting the other co-owners right of possession, then the occupying co-owner may be required to pay an occupation rent.

Front

What is another exception to the general rule regarding occupation rent in marital properties, and what are the authorities for this?

Back

In the cases of Re Pavlou and Dennis v McDonald, the court held that in a case where two spouses co-own a property, but the marriage breaks down and one partner decides to leave the property, the other partner who decided to stay in the property may be required to pay an occupation rent. 

Front

What is the second-to-last exception to the general rule regarding occupation rent, and what is the authority for this?

Back

Another exception to the general rule is if the occupying co-owner has fundamentally altered the purpose for which the property was co-owned by destroying/ altering the property in a certain way. This is what happened in the case of Wilkinson v Haygarth, where the court held that in such a case of ouster, the occupying co-owner will be required to pay an occupation rent.

Front

What is the last exception to the general rule regarding occupation rent, and what is the authority for this?

Back

Equitable accounting is another exception to the general rule, and this means that if a co-ownership is coming to an end, for the purposes of equitable accounting, the court may order that the co-owners who did not contribute to any renovations made on the property, pay an occupation rent.

Front

Define the tort of waste.

Back

Waste is a tort that results in severe loss/destruction of the property (although not as much as ouster) because of a positive act on the part of a co-owner, or an ommision to reasonably take a positive act which results in the destruction/ damage of the property.

Front

What damages can the other co-owners accure if another co-owner is liable under the tort of waste?

Back

The co-owner causing destruction must pay the other co-owners for any losses due to the destruction of the property.

Front

If a claimant were to bring a claim against another co-owner for waste, what statute/ provision would the claimant need to cite?

Back

The property Law Act 2007, s69.