Judgment handed down in Hudson v Hathway [2022] EWCA Civ 1648

Alexander Learmonth KC comments: 

“On the principle of the common intention constructive trust, we achieved what we set out to: The case re-establishes detrimental reliance as an essential ingredient in the common intention constructive trust, whether in sole name cases or joint names cases, even where it is a change to a presumed beneficial joint tenancy.”

The Court has now decided that the Appellant’s typed name at the bottom of an email was a sufficient signature, and a phrase telling the Respondent to ‘take the [proceeds of sale of] house’ was a sufficient disposition of his severable half-share in it, to constitute an enforceable disposition under s.53 of the Law of Property Act 1925. Though this appears to be the first CA authority on a typed name as an email signature, and the first authority of any sort applying that to a domestic situation, the case was decided on that basis.