CHANCERY DIVISION
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL |
||
B e f o r e :
____________________
ABU ABDULLAH |
Claimant |
|
- and - |
||
AZIZUR RAHMAN JALIL ABDUL JALIL ABDUL ROUF |
Defendants |
____________________
Azizur Rahman Jalil in person
Hearing dates: 22-23 February 2005
____________________
Crown Copyright ©
Mr Justice Pumfrey:
i) The purchase price of the property was £130,000, the mortgage obtained being approximately £96,000;
ii) Mr Jalil Senior's contribution was £17,500, and Mr Rouf and the Claimant paid together £17,500 (£8,750 each);
iii) "To date only one yearly account (first year's) was submitted by Mr Jalil Snr/Jnr and profit/loss split 50-50 and our share (mine and Mr Abdullah) share was paid by a cheque issued to me by Mr Jalil Junior."
"I do not know Mr Abdullah – never met him! I am the freeholder of 5 Avenue Parade – I do NOT have any partners in this! I purchased via a mortgage. I DO NOT UNDERSTAND how Mr Abdullah can claim such a thing as he and I have never met . . . I assume this case has nothing to do with me – it may relate to matters between the claimant and my father since I have spoken to my dad and he has never had any business dealings with the claimant either. I enclose the letter I received from the claimant's solicitor which I did not respond to as I did not believe it was addressed to me and did not refer to 5 Avenue Parade or anything other than my dad, my dad's name "Jnred" (i.e. me) and Mr Rouf. I did pass this on to my dad, he suggested it must be some kind of hoax, I therefore ignored it."
"I accept that that cheque [sc. the cheque for £8,500] was handed to Mr Rouf, who in turn handed it to Mr Jalil Senior, who put it in the account of his son. That is a very far cry from making this man, the Claimant, a 25% beneficial owner. It is true that it may well have represented half the £17,000 which was the share of Mr Rouf as deposit. But as I say, that does not show in any way that there was a constructive trust or a common intention that the Claimant should beneficially have 25% of the freehold."
He indicates a little later in the judgment that Mr Rouf may have a good case himself.
The Background
i) Were the funds provided by Mr Abdullah and Mr Rouf towards the deposit lent by Mr Rouf to Mr Jalil Senior?
ii) Was there an express oral agreement between Mr Abdullah and the Jalils that Mr Abdullah would have a 25% beneficial interest in the property?
iii) If not, is an agreement that Mr Abdullah would have an interest to be inferred from all the circumstances?
iv) If not, does Mr Rouf have a beneficial interest in the property on either of the two bases outlined in (ii) and (iii) above, mutatis mutandis?
v) If so, what is the quantum of that interest?
vi) If so, does Mr Rouf hold half of any such interest as he may be entitled to on "sub-trust" for Mr Abdullah?
vii) If so, should Mr Abdullah's "sub-trust" interest be given effect to by a declaration or does it "collapse" automatically so that Mr Abdullah is entitled to a declaration that Mr Jalil Junior holds the property on trust for him as to 25% or some other share?
RENT PROFIT STATEMENT (5 Avenue Parade,
(5th August 1999 to 5th April 2000)
Total Rents Received (Accrual Basis) = 8/12 ... 15,000
= £10,000
Mortgage payments made = 8 ... £897 = £7,176
Interest Paid over the period = £7,070.24
Taxable income = £2,929.76
Tax due = 40% ... £2,929.76
=£ 1,171.92
... PROFIT net of capital repayment = £10,000 LESS
£7,176 LESS £1,171
=£1,652.08
NET (of tax) PROFIT FOR 5/8/99 to 5/4/00 is £1,652.08