A man is challenging a High Court ruling of August 1999, that his brother was entitled to the whole of the beneficial freehold interest in a South Ruislip property under an agreement with their parents, who are now deceased.
The court was told that the property at 26A/26B, Wingfield Way was purchased in November 1980 by Barry White and his parents, under the local authoritys “right to buy” scheme, as joint tenants at law and in equity.
However, his brother Brian White claims that the property was held on trust for Barry and himself and for another brother, Peter, who has since died.
John Waters, counsel for Brian White, argued that the earlier decision, that Barry was entitled to a declaration that he was the sole owner of the property, was wrong. He said that the judge had failed to analyse sufficiently the factual issues and documentation in the case, and that he had arrived at his judgment without sufficient regard to the “building blocks of the reasoned judicial process”.
However, Philip Noble, counsel for Barry White, said that the intention behind transferring the property into the joint names of Barry and his parents was, that the property would pass to Barry by survivorship.
Under the agreement, he said, Barry was to be responsible for the payment of the mortgage and his parents would be entitled to reside at the premises, rent free, for the rest of their lives. In return, Barry would own the property and would, accordingly, be entitled to any proceeds of sale.
He argued that the existence of the agreement was “overwhelming both in contemporaneous documents and on the evidence”.
The hearing continues.
White v White & another Court of Appeal (Henry, Robert Walker & Longmore LJJ) 7 June 2001.
PLS News 7/6/01
