Facts
- The case concerned two doctors who jointly owned property used as a medical practice.
- Disputes arose regarding the use and division of the shared premises.
- Physical partition of the property would have disrupted its functionality for both doctors’ work.
- Proceedings were brought to determine whether an occupation order or partition was the appropriate remedy under the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 (TOLATA).
- The lower court granted an occupation order, and this was appealed.
Issues
- Whether courts should favour partition or occupation orders in resolving disputes under TOLATA where physical division of property is impractical.
- The extent to which courts should consider section 15 TOLATA factors when making orders about the use or partition of jointly owned land.
- Whether practicality and the parties’ particular circumstances should guide the decision between partition and occupation.
Decision
- The Court of Appeal upheld the occupation order, confirming it as an appropriate remedy where physical division would harm the co-owners’ use of the property.
- It was held that partition is no longer the automatic or preferred solution under TOLATA.
- The court emphasised that section 15 requires balancing all relevant factors rather than giving overriding weight to any one consideration.
- Practical outcomes and the real interests of parties are to guide the court’s approach to co-ownership disputes.
Legal Principles
- Section 14 of TOLATA grants courts broad discretion to make orders regarding jointly owned land, including for partition or occupation.
- Section 15 sets out factors courts must consider: the trust’s purpose, intended use of the property, children’s needs, and creditors’ interests.
- Courts should favour remedies that are workable and fair, with partition ordered only where suitable and not as the default.
- Occupation orders may be used where physical division of property is unworkable or detrimental.
- Judicial flexibility, with fact-sensitive analysis, underpins use of the TOLATA framework in property disputes.
Conclusion
Rodway v Landy established that TOLATA 1996 requires courts to prioritise practical and fair solutions in co-ownership disputes, weighing all section 15 factors and permitting occupation orders where partition is not feasible, thereby shaping modern property law approaches to shared ownership.