Interpreting "D.I.Y." documents: severance, release, trusts, certainty, vesting and undue influence

Research output: Contribution to journalBook/Film/Article review

Abstract

Comments on the Chancery Division decision in Wallbank v Price on whether a home-made ("DIY") document signed by a wife and purporting to revoke her rights as a beneficial joint tenant in the matrimonial home, which was acquired under the right-to-buy scheme, should be set aside for duress or undue influence. Details the court's analysis of the principles supporting a successful claim of undue influence, the nature of the DIY document, its meaning and its effect. Considers possible reasons for the parties' use of the document.

Cases Wallbank v Price (2007) EWHC 3001 (Ch); (2008) 2 FLR 501 (Ch D (Birmingham)) : Royal Bank of Scotland Plc v Etridge (No.2) (2001) UKHL 44; (2002) 2 AC 773 (HL) : Paul v Constance (1977) 1 WLR 527 (CA (Civ Div))
Statutes Housing Act 1985
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)336-345
Number of pages4
JournalConveyancer and Property Lawyer
Volume72
Publication statusPublished - Jul 2008

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Interpreting "D.I.Y." documents: severance, release, trusts, certainty, vesting and undue influence'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this