Question
‘In the absence of long-awaited, but currently unlikely, legislative reform, separating cohabitants have to rely on the common law and the common intention constructive trust (CICT). Unfortunately, this branch of law is almost uniformly criticised.’
Newnham A ‘Common Intention Constructive Trusts: A Way Forward’ (2013) Family Law, June p.718.
Critically analyse the above statement with reference to case law.
Historical and the recent position
The approach of familiarisation.
Feminist approach to the question, please. Can you please also keep the introduction short please. Thank you
Reading:
Andrew Hayward ‘Family property’ and the process of ‘familialisation’ of property law (2012):
https://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/chilflq24&div=26&g_sent=1&collection=journals
Anne Barlow – Cohabitation law reform – messages from research (2006)
Charlotte Bendall – A Break Away from the (Hetero)norm?: Lawrence v Gallagher [2012] 1 FCR 557; [2012] EWCA Civ 394
Simone Wong Trust(s) is not enough: An Argument for the Use of Unjust Enrichment for Home- https://kar.kent.ac.uk/1558/1/When_Trust(s)_16NOV07DP.pdf
cases:
Oxley v Hiscock [2004] EWCA Civ 546, [2005] Fam. 211
Stack v Dowden [2007] UKHL 17, [2007] 2 A.C. 432
Jones v Kernott [2011] UKSC 53, [2012]1 A.C. 776
Graham-York v York 2015 EWCA Civ 72
Barnes v Philips (2015) EWCA Civ 1056
Lloyds Bank v. Rosset [1991]
TAKE ADVANTAGE OF OUR PROMOTIONAL DISCOUNT DISPLAYED ON THE WEBSITE AND GET A DISCOUNT FOR YOUR PAPER NOW!