Answering Problem Questions Law Coursework Research Paper (Coursework Sample)

Answering Problem Questions
Question #3
The fact pattern as presented gives rise to three important issues. First, whether the method of owning the house by the three amounts to a joint tenancy and if yes, the nature of interest held by each person. Second, whether Safe Bank Ltd has any remedy in the law regarding the house which is now a subject of mortgage. Thirdly, whether Jacek has any interest in the property based on Radek’s will.
According to Section 34 of the Law of Property Act 1925 (LPA), there is a general presumption that where property is conveyed in the names of more than one person, then joint tenancy (a method of co-ownership of property) arises, which, according to Section 36 of LPA, cannot be severed. In the fact pattern, we are told that the house was registered in the joint names of Piotr, Mirka, and Radek. The case of Goodman v. Gallant [1986] found that the statement of intention in the deed is sufficient to confirm the intention of the parties. Since the property, in this case, was registered in the name of the three, it turns out that the three are joint tenants who are holding the house in trust for themselves.
One crucial feature of joint tenancy is that usually, every tenant is wholly entitled to the whole property, at least according to the case of Murray v. Hall (1840). For example, the law regards Piotr, Mirka, and Radek as one person who owns the entire equitable interest in the house as registered in their joint names. Because they own it together, it turns out that at the individual level, each of them legally owns nothing, hence cannot pass any good title to the property to a third party because none of the parties can claim a specific share in the property. This informs why in joint ownership, there exist the four unities, namely, the unities of purpose, interest, title, and time. In the unity of possession, it is presumed that each of the three tenants owns the entire house and that none of them can exclude the other from possession. On the other hand, the unity of interest maintains that as joint tenants, Piotr, Mirka, and Radek have the same type of interest. While the unity of title means that the three must derive their title from the same conveyance instrument, the unity of time provides that the interest of the joint tenants must vest at the same time and for the same duration.