Bull v Bull [1955] 1 QB 234
Constructive trusts arising from join tenancies.
Facts
A mother and son jointly purchased a property, however the son contributed a greater proportion of the original purchase price and took on full legal title to the house. Both parties intended to live in the property on the agreement that the mother would occupy two rooms of the house and the son being the principle user of the remainder. After some time the parties had a disagreement and the son subsequently asked his mother to cease occupation of the property
Issue
Whether the mother was entitled to continue occupying the house until it was sold, on the grounds that she was a tenant in common and thus entitled to have her co-possession of the property recognised. Further, how ought the law approach ownership where the parties in question have contributed unequally.
Decision/Outcome
Here, the Court held, with Lord Denning presiding, that the son was holding the property jointly on trust for his mother and himself and that the presumption of sale should not interfere with the mother’s right of occupation before then. Thus, where property is owned by tenants in common, all tenants are entitled to enjoy the benefits of the property and thus a constructive trust can be identified as existing. Further, ownership was considered generally to reflect each parties’ contributions to the purchase price, where there was no significant factor to indicate otherwise. Significantly, the legal principle of fairness was focused upon by the Court.
Updated 19 March 2026
This case note accurately summarises the decision in Bull v Bull [1955] 1 QB 234. The case remains good law as an early authority on resulting trusts arising from unequal contributions to a purchase price and the rights of co-owners (particularly tenants in common) to occupy jointly held property.
Readers should be aware, however, that the legal landscape surrounding co-ownership and informal property rights has developed substantially since 1955. In particular, the House of Lords in Stack v Dowden [2007] UKHL 17 and the Supreme Court in Jones v Kernott [2011] UKSC 53 significantly refined the approach to quantifying beneficial interests in jointly purchased property, particularly in domestic contexts, moving the analysis towards common intention constructive trusts and, where necessary, an imputed intention based on what is fair. These later authorities are the primary modern reference points for disputes about beneficial ownership of shared property and should be read alongside Bull v Bull for a complete picture. The article’s description of the trust in Bull v Bull as a ‘constructive trust’ is a simplification; the trust identified in that case is more precisely characterised in subsequent case law as a resulting trust.
The statutory framework governing trusts of land has also changed entirely since 1955. The Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 (TOLATA 1996) abolished the trust for sale regime that was applicable at the time of Bull v Bull and replaced it with a trust of land, under which beneficiaries may have a right to occupy (see sections 12 and 13 of TOLATA 1996). The article’s reference to a ‘presumption of sale’ reflects the old law and is no longer an accurate description of the current statutory position.
