Court: Court of Appeal
Citation: [1983] 1 WLR 1203
Date: 1983
Judges: Lord Denning MR, Lord Justice Lawton, Lord Justice Dillon
Area of Law: Family Law, Property Law (Joint Tenancy, Severance, Matrimonial Causes Act 1973)
The case of Harris v Goddard [1983] 1 WLR 1203 is a significant English case in family law and property law, particularly regarding the severance of joint tenancies in the context of divorce proceedings.
The case explores whether a divorce petition, in which one spouse requests a severance of joint tenancy under section 24 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973, is sufficient to sever the joint tenancy immediately. The Court of Appeal in Harris v Goddard clarified the legal requirements for severing joint tenancies, highlighting the importance of an immediate intention and formal action to achieve severance.
Facts of Harris v Goddard
Mr and Mrs Harris were joint tenants of the matrimonial home. As their marriage deteriorated, Mrs Harris filed for divorce, requesting, among other things, that the court sever the joint tenancy under section 24 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973. Mrs Harris petitioned for an order to divide the matrimonial assets, including the family home, which she wished to sever from the joint tenancy arrangement. However, before the hearing could take place, Mr Harris tragically died in a car accident.
Following his death, Mrs Harris sought to assert her right to the matrimonial home, claiming that she was entitled to the right of survivorship under the joint tenancy. She argued that the joint tenancy had already been severed, based on the inclusion of the request for severance in the divorce petition.
The central issue, therefore, was whether the divorce petition itself, by including a prayer for severance, effectively severed the joint tenancy, or whether formal action was required to bring about severance.
Issues
The central issue in Harris v Goddard was whether a divorce petition that included a request for the severance of joint tenancy under section 24 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 was sufficient to sever the joint tenancy. Specifically, the case raised the question of whether the prayer for severance in the petition could have an immediate effect, or whether a formal notice of intention to sever the tenancy was required.
Legal Principles
The case deals with the principles of joint tenancy and severance of joint tenancies, as well as the procedural requirements for severance under English law. Key legal principles involved in this case include:
- Joint Tenancy and Right of Survivorship: A joint tenancy is a form of concurrent ownership where two or more people hold equal shares in property, and upon the death of one co-owner, the property automatically passes to the surviving co-owner(s) through the right of survivorship.
- Severance of Joint Tenancy: Severance of a joint tenancy ends the right of survivorship and converts the joint tenancy into a tenancy in common, where each co-owner holds a distinct share in the property. Severance may be achieved through specific legal actions, such as a written notice of severance or a declaration by the parties involved.
- Section 24 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973: This section allows the court to make orders regarding property during divorce proceedings, including orders for the transfer or settlement of property. While the Act provides the court with discretion to address the division of matrimonial assets, it does not automatically sever joint tenancies unless the proper steps are taken.
- Section 36(2) of the Law of Property Act 1925: This section stipulates that to sever a joint tenancy, there must be an intention to do so, and the severance must be immediate. A formal notice of severance must be served in writing to take effect.
Harris v Goddard Judgment
The Court of Appeal, in delivering its judgment, held that the joint tenancy had not been severed by Mrs Harris’ petition. The court ruled that the inclusion of a prayer for severance in the divorce petition did not automatically sever the joint tenancy. The judgment rested on the fact that a request for severance in a divorce petition was not sufficient to sever the joint tenancy unless the severance was intended to take effect immediately.
Lord Denning MR, in his judgment, explained that a mere request for severance in the divorce petition could not sever the joint tenancy. The petition was essentially an invitation to the court to exercise its discretion and decide whether to sever the joint tenancy. The petition did not constitute a formal notice of severance or an immediate intention to sever the joint tenancy.
Lord Justice Lawton, agreeing with Lord Denning, emphasised that severance required more than just an intention; it required formal, immediate action. He stated that for severance to be effective, there must be an express intention to sever the joint tenancy, accompanied by formal documentation such as a written notice under section 36(2) of the Law of Property Act 1925. The mere inclusion of the prayer for severance in the petition did not meet this requirement.
Lord Justice Dillon also agreed, noting that the petition in Harris v Goddard was a request for the court to consider severance at a later hearing, not a clear and immediate severance. He stated that the petition had no immediate effect and that the joint tenancy remained intact until the court exercised its discretion.
Conclusion
In conclusion, Harris v Goddard [1983] 1 WLR 1203 is a landmark case that clarified the legal requirements for severing joint tenancies in divorce proceedings. The Court of Appeal held that a petition for divorce, which includes a prayer for severance, does not automatically sever the joint tenancy unless the severance is immediate and formal.
This case remains an important reference point for family law practitioners and property law scholars, as it underscores the need for clear and immediate action when severing joint tenancies and the importance of proper legal procedures in divorce cases.
