Cambridge BA: Co-ownership & Proprietary Estoppel Exam Paper

In 2010, Alice and Bob purchased 'Greenacres', a country house, as joint tenants in law and equity for £500,000, contributing equally to the purchase price. In 2015, Alice married Charles and moved to London, leaving Bob in sole occupation of the property. Alice began paying the mortgage payments alone while Bob covered all maintenance costs and council tax. In 2018, without consulting Bob, Alice purported to sever the joint tenancy by serving a written notice on Bob, stating she wished to hold as tenants in common in equal shares. Bob ignored this notice. In 2020, Alice died, leaving all her property to Charles in her will. Bob claims he is now the sole owner of Greenacres through survivorship. Charles argues that the joint tenancy was validly severed in 2018, making him entitled to Alice's half-share. Charles also claims he has acquired an interest in the property through proprietary estoppel, as Alice had repeatedly assured him that 'half the house would be his one day' and he had spent £15,000 on renovations in 2019 in reliance on these assurances. Meanwhile, Bob has applied for an order for sale under s.14 TOLATA 1996, claiming he needs the capital to downsize. Advise Charles on his prospects of success.

David owns the registered freehold of 'Hillview House' which he purchased in 2015 for £400,000 using a mortgage from Britannia Bank. In 2017, David began a relationship with Emma, who moved into the property. Emma contributed £20,000 towards a new kitchen and conservatory, believing this would give her 'a stake in the house' after David said 'what's mine is yours, darling.' Emma also took responsibility for paying all household bills totaling approximately £800 per month. In 2019, David's daughter Fiona from his previous marriage moved into the property with her two young children following her divorce. David told Fiona she could 'stay as long as needed' and that 'the house will be yours eventually anyway.' Fiona spent £8,000 converting the attic into bedrooms and has paid David £300 per month towards household expenses. In 2020, David lost his job and stopped making mortgage payments. Britannia Bank now seeks possession. David has also received an offer to sell Hillview House for £450,000 from a developer and wishes to accept it, planning to move abroad. Emma and Fiona both object to the sale and claim they have interests in the property. David argues that both women were merely licensees and that any improvements were gifts. The property is registered solely in David's name. Advise Emma and Fiona on their respective positions, considering both their potential interests in the property and their ability to resist possession proceedings by Britannia Bank.

"The decision in Stack v Dowden represents a radical departure from orthodox property principles and has created more problems than it has solved in determining beneficial ownership of the family home." Critically analyse this statement, considering both the theoretical foundations of the Stack v Dowden approach and its practical application in subsequent case law.

"Proprietary estoppel has evolved from a narrow defensive doctrine into an expansive cause of action that threatens to undermine the certainty and formality requirements of property law." Examine the development of proprietary estoppel doctrine and assess whether its current scope is justified.