Sentences with phrase «shared intention of the parties»

In doing so, the court looked at factors other than simple financial contribution and directly linked the issue of the shared intention of the parties (although as one party at this stage was deceased, that must have been somewhat challenging).

Not exact matches

The graphs below show how changes in the shares of council seats won by each party are strongly correlated with changes in general election vote intentions.

Sharing thoughts on his ambitions and intention to lead the NDC in the 2020 General Elections, he said the party has not recovered till date from some terrible and unpardonable mistakes former President John Mahama made during his term of office.

This result indicates that the three main parties share 87 % of voting intentions - how long before the poll which reads Labour 16 %, Lib Dem 17 %, Conservative 54 %?

-LSB-...] This post was shared over at My Turn for Us, Create With Joy, Pieced Pastimes, A Time for Seasons, Pam's Party and Practical Tips, Scrapality, Tater Tots and Jello, My Snippets of Inspiration, The Jenny Evolution, Across the Blvd, Natasha in Oz, A Proverbs 31 Wife, A Peek into My Paradise, I Choose Joy, A Life in Balance, A Life of Faith, Mom's the Word, Squishable Baby, The Sustainable Couple, Mommy A to Z, Growing Hands On Kids, A Hope in Every Season, Rosilind Jukic, Raising Homemakers, Women with Intention, Chickadee Homestead, My Stay at Home Adventures, Have a Daily Cup of Mrs. Olson, Oak Hill Homestead, and Katherine's Corner.

Unaware of each other's intentions, Andie and Ben are set up at a party and share a mutual attraction.

The crucial question at the heart of this particular case was whether, following Mr Kernott's departure from 39 Badger Hall Avenue, an intention between the parties could be found which would rebut the presumption of joint beneficial ownership (which presumption generally arises where there is joint legal ownership and no express declaration of trust that the co-owners should own in anything other than equal shares).

Reversing the decision of the Court of Appeal and restoring the determination of the trial judge (upheld in the High Court on appeal) the Supreme Court concluded that the facts in the present case did give rise to an inference that the intentions of the parties (to own the property in equal beneficial shares, consistent with their legal ownership) did change when Mr Kernott acquired his own property independently of Ms Jones.

In those cases where it is clear either (a) that the parties did not intend a joint tenancy at the outset or (b) had changed their original intention, but it is not possible to ascertain by direct evidence or by inference what their actual intention was as to the shares in which they would own the property, «the answer is that each is entitled to that share which the Court considers fair having regard to the whole course of dealing between them in relation to the property».

Where it is clear that the parties did not intend a joint tenancy upon purchase, or had changed their original intention as to their beneficial shares, but it is not possible to ascertain by direct evidence or inference what their actual intention was, each is entitled to that share which the court considers fair having regard to the whole course of dealing between them in relation to the property.

The Court of Appeal, by a majority, upheld Kernott's appeal, finding that the parties owned the beneficial interest as tenants in common in equal shares as there was no evidence that the parties» intentions had changed after their separation.

The presumption of joint and equitable ownership can be rebutted by evidence that the parties did not at the time of purchase intend to own the property jointly in equity, or that the parties» intention as to beneficial ownership has changed over time (for example, where the parties did not share their financial resources).

Baroness Hale, with whom the majority agreed, emphasised that the court should ascertain the parties» shared intentions, actual, inferred or imputed, with respect to the property in the light of their whole course of conduct.

[35] This is not a situation where a property was originally registered in the name of one party with an intention to share the property subsequently arising, as is often the case in domestic relationships.

The common intention resulting trust arises where two parties share an intention that a property be jointly owned in light of joint contributions even though the property is held in the name of only one of the parties.

The trial judge refused to take into account the wife's costs of disposing of her shares in calculating the equalization payment, on the basis that there was a lack of evidence as to what the parties» intentions were with their shares as at the date of separation.

The Court of Appeal held that the judge at first instance had erred in concentrating on the parties financial contributions to the property but emphasised the importance of a shared intention.

This well - intentioned gesture may result in a double - whammy of taxes under the provisions of the Income Tax Act: the rules dictate that if you sell shares to a related party you are treated as having received monies equal to the fair market value of the shares, while the children will be treated as having a cost base for the future determination of any capital gains, based on the price actually paid by them to you.