Q:Adam receives a text message to return home urgently because his father, Noah, is gravely ill. Noah dies before Adam reaches home. Upon his arrival home, he is greeted by his stepmother, Ruth, from whom Noah was divorced. She is visiting from New York. During their conversation, which becomes heated, Adam says, "And what might you be doing here? I suppose that after over 20 years abroad you think that you can just walk in and claim Dad's property? Dad went on with his life and re-married. I suggest you leave".

Ruth retorts, "Well I didn't sign the papers he sent to transfer my interest in this house to him. Last time I checked I was still a joint tenant. You and the widow had better start looking for somewhere else to live!"

With reference to decided cases:

(i) Identify and explain Ruth's basis for claiming that she is entitled to the property that she held as a joint tenant with Noah. [ 6 marks]

(ii) Comment on the likelihood of Ruth succeeding with her claim.

a)Ruth being a joint tenant with Noah means that they would both own the property, meaning both parties own the entirety of the property, not specific sections or items. It’s one big share that they both hold. One of the key characteristics of a joint tenancy is the right to survivorship, which states that if one joint tenant dies, their equal share of the entirety of the property goes to the other joint tenant aka “survives”. Hence the basis of Ruth’s claim is that since Noah is dead, she would benefit from the right of survivorship and own the entirety of the house. (6 marks)

b)A possible outcome is that Ruth and Noah are our joint tenants and Noah has died. The key element of the right of survivorship comes into play, and therefore the rights of Noah would transfer to Ruth and she would be the sole joint tenant of the property which means that Adam and his mother would have to vacate the premises because the property belongs to as she is the sole surviving joint tenant, meaning she has the share of the whole property

Another possible outcome is that Ruth would have to acknowledge the equitable interest that Adam and his mother have in the house. This is only because she knew about them living with the father. If she didn’t know, no equitable interest would exist and she could claim the property

Another possible outcome is that if Noah broke his side of the joint tenancy by forming a tenancy in common and giving shares of the property to his wife and Adam then there are entitled to 50% of the property while Ruth is still entitled to 50% she cannot own the full property in this case of survivorship won’t apply.

Another possible outcome is that due to living 20 years on the property, unbeknownst to Ruth, Noah made Adam and his wife a joint tenant. In that case upon the death of Noah, they Would be entitled to the same rights as Ruth, all three owning the entire property together, not parts.