翻訳と辞書 |
National Provincial Bank Ltd v Ainsworth : ウィキペディア英語版 | National Provincial Bank Ltd v Ainsworth
''National Provincial Bank Ltd v Ainsworth'' () (UKHL 1 ) is an English land law case, concerning the quality of a person's interest in a home when people live together, as well as licenses in land. The House of Lords held that someone living in a home, who was deserted, did not by that fact alone have an interest in equity. Lord Wilberforce offered a definition of property rights, however this decision was compromised, and may not be counted as stable law, as the concept of the constructive trust was developed further.〔See ''Jones v Kernott''〕 ==Facts== Mr and Mrs Ainsworth lived in Milward Rd, Sussex and had four children. Mr Ainsworth was the registered owner, but moved out in 1957, borrowed £1000 in 1958 from the bank, and gave the bank a charge over the family home. This was used to finance his small business, called Hastings Car Mart Ltd, incorporated at the end of 1959. However, he had left Mrs Ainsworth living in the home, deserting their relationship. In 1962 Mr Ainsworth fell behind in the payments to the bank, and the bank sought possession of the house. However, Mrs Ainsworth refused to leave because she contended that she had an interest in the home that bound the bank.
抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア(Wikipedia)』 ■ウィキペディアで「National Provincial Bank Ltd v Ainsworth」の詳細全文を読む
スポンサード リンク
翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース |
Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.
|
|