Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
This judgment contains my written reasons for refusing the plaintiff's application for an order for licitation sought by way of an application for summary judgment.
The background to the present proceedings is as follows. In 2012 the plaintiff the first defendant and the first defendant's brother ("J") purchased a property as joint owners ("the Property").
The purchase price was raised by £350,000 being provided by the second defendants and the remainder by way of a hypothec. When the Property was acquired half of the hypothec was paid jointly by the plaintiff and the first defendant with the other half being paid by the first defendant's brother. When the Property was acquired the ground floor was occupied by the second defendants, the first floor was occupied by the plaintiff and the first defendant, who were partners, and what has been described as a granny flat was occupied by the first defendant's brother.
This arrangement was set out in an agreement entered into between the plaintiff, the first defendant, the first defendant's brother and the second defendants in 2012 ("the Agreement"). The Agreement was drafted by Benest & Syvret who acted for all of the plaintiff and the defendants. The relevant provisions of the Agreement for the purposes of this judgment are as follows: -
"Clause 1.1 sale notice a notice in writing served by [E], [F] and/or [J] upon the others of them requiring them to sell the property in accordance with the terms of clause 5 hereof;
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.