Facebook Pixel Code
We use cookies to create the best experience for you. Keep on browsing if you are OK with that, or find out how to manage cookies.

The Decision by Supreme Court Concerning the Jones v Kernott Case

This is a preview of the 10-page document
Read full text

Leonard Kernott and Patricia Jones started cohabiting in 1983 and had two children. They purchased a family home in joint names at 39 Badger Hall Avenue for £ 30,000 in 1984. The couple lived in this home for around eleven years. Upon separation of the two in 1993, Kernott deserted their family home, while the claimant stayed with children in the house. Jones did not apply for the Child Support Agency. Kernott quit making mortgage contribution to the property and demonstrated little commitment towards maintaining their two children. Their joint effort in selling the property for £ 70,000 in October 1995 was unsuccessful.

The parties, however, cashed in on mutually owned insurance policy, of which the proceeds were shared equally. Kernott used his share to mortgage a house at 114 Stanley Road in Essex for around £ 57,000. Jones used her share to perform cosmetic surgery. Kernott invoked correspondence in order to claim his share of the property at 39 Badger Hall Avenue. In 2007, Jones filed a lawsuit against Kernott’ s claim for a joint share of the property (Mee 2012).

Jones claimed that Kernott’ s purchase of property at 114 Stanley Road was an indication of the change in his intention for joint tenancy over the house.   Ms Jones sought quantification of their respective property interests. The claimant sought greater share of the property. The court ruling by Judge Dedman was that Jones merited 90 % of property ownership.   Nicholas Strauss QC, a deputy judge of the High Court, approved the decision on the appeal by the defendant (Pawlowski 2012). A further appeal by Kernott led to the overturning of the Strauss’ s decision on majority voting by the Court of Appeal.

The decision was that the parties were entitled to an equal share of the property at 39 Badger Hall Avenue. This was based on finding that the intention of the parties was unchanged. Jones had filed an appeal to the Supreme Court, which led to the restoration of Strauss’ s decision (Yip 2012; Mee 2012).

This is a preview of the 10-page document
Open full text
Close ✕
Tracy Smith Editor&Proofreader
Expert in: Law, Sociology, Religion and Theology
Hire an Editor
Matt Hamilton Writer
Expert in: Law, Social science, History
Hire a Writer
preview essay on The Decision by Supreme Court Concerning the Jones v Kernott Case
  • Pages: 10 (2753 words)
  • Document Type: Case Study
  • Subject: Law
  • Level: Undergraduate
WE CAN HELP TO FIND AN ESSAYDidn't find an essay?

Please type your essay title, choose your document type, enter your email and we send you essay samples

Contact Us