Sam and Jess were the legal and equitable owners of the property due to the transfer of conveyance into both of their names and the express declaration that they wish to hold the equitable title as joint tenants (JT’s). However, Jess’s letter to Sam may constitute as a severance of the equitable title, meaning they will go from JT’s to tenants in common (TIC). Under sections 1(6) and 36 of the Law of Property Act 1925 (LPA) states, that where there is shared legal title, the persons must hold share it as JT’s. The letter will constitute as written notice and sufficient severance under section 36(2) of the LPA as long as the letter passes the criteria of severance, that is that it is that it has been served to all of the JT’s and there’s an intention for immediate severance. …show more content…
Section 196(3) LPA 1925 it is stated that if the severance is delivered at the last known abode, then it will be said to have been delivered. Therefore, in this scenario, as Sam was living at CeCe’s house before his death and the letter of severance was delivered there, it will have been sufficiently delivered. In the case of Re Draper’s Conveyance it was held that by asking for an order for sale and division of proceeds for the property was sufficiently clear and showed an immediate intention to sever. This means that by Jess asking to buy Sams 25% share from him, this shows an intention for immediate severance. As severance is likely to have occurred, they will then be held as TIC. The main difference with this is that the rule of survivorship does not