Co-ownership - Scotland

Terataki
Mind Map by Terataki, updated more than 1 year ago
Terataki
Created by Terataki about 6 years ago
655
2

Description

Joint / Common, Alterations and Repairs, Matrimonial homes, Getting out
Tags

Resource summary

Co-ownership - Scotland
1 Common
1.1 COMMON V JOINT
1.1.1 Nature of title
1.1.1.1 Common- each has a pro indiviso or undivided share in the whole subjects- no need to be equal but must be specified
1.1.1.2 Joint- singe title held together - owners cannot separately carry out juristic acts
1.1.2 On death of co-owners
1.1.2.1 (Because of separate shares) a. survivorship clause b. no su.clause but will c. no will - will fall under the law of succession
1.1.2.2 Shares absorbed by co-owners
1.1.3 Rules of management of property
1.1.3.1 Specific rules
1.1.3.2 Rules set out in trust deed - unless unincorporated trust: will have a constitution
2 Joint
2.1
3 use of common property
3.1 common agreement between proprietors: any use permitted - Bailey's Exrs v Upper Crathes Fishing
3.1.1 No common agreement: a. each proprietor entitled to use whole of property b. Only 'ordinary use permitted' Caramichael v Simpson (stored wheelchare- ordinary use) Apps v Sinclair: right to have access to the path - ordinary use: look at the natural use c. no excessive benefit
3.1.1.1 if a. is breached: recovery for the unlawful exclusive possession: Price v Watson: no remedy of ejection as the title of the D will be the same of the pursuer- held: the proceedings should be assisted in order to allow the bringing of an action for division and sale as the appropriate remedy in the circumstances
4 alterations (= work improve the state of the property or bring it down) and repairs (= cannot own the common property)
4.1 Anderson v Dalrymple: uncertainty- affects the ownership of the walls of the passage and stair / Rafique v Amin:practical difficulties - too liberal use of common property --- * to bind the successors must be in writing
4.1.1 if not agreed - interdict is possible
4.2 Difference is not always clear in practice: McLay v Bennett and Bennett: held: Carry our work in an elevator even if new- did not require repair- could recover cost
4.3 Repairs:
4.3.1 consent of all is required
4.3.2 necessary repairs may be carried out by any proprietor and costs may be recovered pro rata
4.3.3 Deans v Wolfson: approved the general principle of veto- no need for the agreement of the co-proprietors
5 Getting out
5.1 Transfer (of his/her own share)
5.2 (physical) Division and sale
5.2.1 Limits: a. contracting out b. Personal Bar c. Common interest
6 matrimonial homes
6.1 Family protection (Scotland) Act s,19 Crow v Crow: occupancy right held not to cease on diveorce
Show full summary Hide full summary

Similar

Property Law (notes based)
Michaela Seal
OLA 1984 trespassers
pavlina.hunt
Leases
meyer cohn
Property Law
Michaela Seal
Co-Ownership
Ravneet Bola
Easements
Daniel Hill
PROPERTY - Chapter 1
cfran51821
LA1104 week 8
Megan Mackie
Chapter 8
Ryan Fryer
RIGHTS - Chapter 2
cfran51821
Secure Real Estate
William Ryan