Tenancy in common permits two or more even individuals to have possession interests in an assets. Every owner has the due right to give their share of the asset to any beneficiary when the owner is dead. Tenancy in common is unique in such a manner that the handover of the property to the beneficiary when the owner dies. The property is owned equally by each member. Therefore, a person may not be able to claim ownership to nay single property or even a section of the property (Duncan, 2014). Moreover, when the co-owner of the property wants to sell the property, they may file a petition and after the asset is sold then they proceeds will be divided equally among the members.
A group of people may come together to wonder a property. They will have equal share wand have same deed and interest. In some countries, couples automatically become joint tenancy while in others have common tenancy. A joint tenancy may be terminated when the parties sell their interest in the asset. For instance, when one or more member owning the property buy out other members then the property is sold and the proceeds are equally distributed among the members or a potion may be filed to allow one member or group sell theirs stake that is in the property (Andersson, Ehlers & Svensson, 2016). Since a tenancy-in-common terms do not legally share a property, several jurisdictions do not separately assign every owner a property revenue bill based on their stakes is contractually distributed to each owner. Overall a common tenancy is a particular sort of concurrent, ownership of property by parties.
One of the cases entails Court of Appeals of Utah, in which Sam Ashworth; Plaintiff as well as the appellant versus Murph Bullock; Defendant as well as the Appellee. Sam Ashworth appealed to get the declaratory judgment establishing that Murph Bullock together with his wife known as Cecelia Bullock are the real owners of the property in Payson; Utah . To give the brief background, in 1976, Bates family and Harris held the assets as joint tenants that had a right of survivorship. The Bullocks family resided in a home situated on the Property, which was under a verbal rental terms with Bates. Both parties had never met and were no aware that one of the parties had an ownership concern in the Property (Iglesias, 2017). There was an attempt to sell the property attempted by Bullocks, which the courts allowed because there was no element of forgery in the writings.
The second case is about, Swartzbaugh versus Sampson. The appeal was made to cancel two leases that was authorized by John Josiah Swartzbaugh (lessor); to Sam Sampson (lessee) concerning two adjacent parcels of land. The motion for the nonsuit was approved at the end of plaintiff’s case, and the appeal followed.
In summary, the type of ownership in which one takes their property may significantly affect the manner in which one may use the property, share it and give it to other people. Since there are advantages as well as consequences to taking the title to assets bye every of the means described in the agreement. It is essential to take understand and consider before getting in an agreement of owning a property.