Skip to main content

Differences-between-joint-tenancy-and-tenants-in-common

When purchasing property, the choice between joint tenancy and tenants in common profoundly influences how ownership is structured. These two types of ownership have distinct rules regarding property division and succession. While both provide co-owners with ownership rights and a share of the property, the key difference lies in the rules governing the death of one of the tenants.

In joint tenancy, co-owners, which can include more than two individuals, collectively own the entire property. They do not specify percentages; instead, each owner holds 100% jointly with the other. Married couples often opt for joint tenancy due to its “right of survivorship.” This means that upon the death of one joint tenant, the deceased’s share automatically passes to the surviving tenant(s) and does not become part of the deceased’s estate. One of the primary advantages of joint tenancy is the automatic right of survivorship. This simplifies the transfer of ownership upon the death of a co-owner, often making it less complex and less expensive compared to tenants in common.

In contrast, tenants in common own specific shares of the property, and these shares can be equal or unequal. Parties who are not automatically entitled to a right of survivorship, such as friends or siblings, usually choose tenancy in common. Upon the death of a tenant in common, their share becomes part of their estate and is distributed according to their Will or the laws of intestacy. Tenants in common offer flexibility in ownership percentages, allowing unequal shares based on individual financial contributions.

Contact Mint Legal at info@mintlegal.com.au or call on 0452441583.  

Or click on the link www.mintlegal.com.au to go the website.

Labels:
Location: Camp Hill QLD 4152, Australia

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

What is conveyancing in Queensland?

Conveyancing is the process of transferring ownership of land from one person to another, under the terms of a contract for the sale of that land. That’s it! Understanding how conveyancing works means understanding that every Australian State has different law, forms, regulations, fees, time requirements, protections, jargon and government departments as part of the conveyancing process. But basically each State follows the same steps – just the details changes. Whether you are buying or selling, there is a Contract that sets out the terms of the sale. The Buyer and Seller have obligations and rights under the Contract. The Conveyancer’s job is to make sure you do what you are supposed to do when you are supposed to do it. That is what Mint Legal does best. Buying or selling a House or Unit in Queensland Conveyancing is crucial in any property transaction. It ensures that the buyer obtains good and marketable title to the property and the rights that run with it, while seller is able ...
Post a Comment
Read more

What is a parenting order?

  Understanding Parenting Orders A parenting order is a legal document that sets out the responsibilities and obligations of parents towards their children after a separation or divorce. This order is usually issued by a court and is designed to ensure the best interests of the child are met. It covers a range of issues including  custody, visitation rights, and financial support . The Purpose of a Parenting Order The main purpose of a parenting order is to provide a clear and enforceable framework for co-parenting. It outlines the rights and responsibilities of each parent, ensuring that both parties understand what is expected of them. The order also serves to protect the child's right to have a relationship with both parents, unless it is found to be harmful to the child. What is Included in a Parenting Order? A parenting order typically includes provisions regarding: Custody :  This refers to who the child will live with. It can be sole (one parent) or joint (shared b...
Post a Comment
Read more

Price v Spoor [2021] HCA 20 - CONTRACTING OUT OF STATUTORY LIMITATION PERIODS

  Understanding the Price v Spoor [2021] HCA 20 Case The case of Price v Spoor [2021] HCA 20, a recent decision by the High Court of Australia, has significant implications for contracting out of statutory limitation periods. This case has brought to light the complexities involved in contractual agreements and their intersection with statutory laws. The Background The case revolves around a loan agreement between Mr. Price and Mr. Spoor, wherein the former loaned $500,000 to the latter. The terms of the agreement stated that Mr. Spoor would repay the loan after a year, with an annual interest rate of 60%. However, Mr. Spoor failed to repay the loan within the stipulated time, leading to the dispute. Contracting Out of Statutory Limitation Periods One of the key aspects of the case was the question of whether parties can contract out of statutory limitation periods. In this case, the loan agreement contained a clause which stated that Mr. Spoor could not plead the statute of limita...
Post a Comment
Read more