Elizabeth practices in both Chancery and Family litigation with an emphasis on disputes between cohabitees and other family members.
Elizabeth is also a Door Tenant at 1 Garden Court, Temple, London, Chambers of Janet Bazley QC and Charles Geekie QC.
Elizabeth’s website www.elizabethdarlington.co.uk provides regular updates on developments in her areas of expertise.
Areas of Expertise
Elizabeth is currently finalising the third edition of the leading practitioner text “Cohabitation and Trusts of Land” published by Sweet and Maxwell in 2016. Elizabeth is General Editor of Cohabitation Law and Precedents (Sweet & Maxwell). This looseleaf provides a comprehensive guide to all issues arising on the separation of cohabitees, including financial provision for children, occupation of the home, and inheritance and succession. It is written by a team of expert practitioners, including barristers, solicitors and members of the judiciary.
In addition, she contributes to Financial Provision in Family Matters (ed. HHJ Wildblood QC and Deborah Eaton QC).
She undertakes a wide range of contentious and non-contentious work including:
She also undertakes cases before the Land Registry Adjudicator.
Elizabeth is often instructed to appear in mediations and arbitrations and accepts instructions as an Early Neutral Evaluator (“ENE”).
Curran v Collins 2015 – application for permission to appeal to the Supreme Court
Elizabeth was instructed to apply for permission to appeal the decision of Curran v Collins  EWCA Civ 404 to the Supreme Court. This case concerned the test to be applied by the Courts in cases in which a property is owned in one partner’s sole name. Permission was refused on the facts of the case.
Begum v Issa and ors  EW Misc B51
Case concerning an unregistered Islamic marriage and therefore governed by property law principles. The case included allegations of fraud; priorities of mortgages and whether an order for sale should be deferred. Before HHJ Behrens.
Aspden v Elvy  EWHC 1387 (Ch)
Dispute between an unmarried couple as to the beneficial ownership of a farm. The High Court found that Elizabeth’s client, the female defendant, had a 75% beneficial interest. As she had consistently offered to settle on a 50/50 basis, the male claimant was ordered to pay her costs.
Kay v. Mills  EWCA Civ 1537
Property dispute between father and daughter. Father sought possession of property purchased on trust by father and daughter upon trust for father’s sole benefit. Defence based on proprietary estoppel. Successful application to the Court of Appeal against decision to strike out the defence.
R (on the application of Ross) v. Leeds City Council  EWHC 2495 (Admin)
Judicial Review of the decision by the Defendant Council to refuse to provide funding for a school bus to transport Jewish children to schools in Manchester.
Al Hawaz v. Thomas Cook Group  All ER (D) 1568:
Travellers cheque fraud; admissibility of similar fact evidence.
Bourne v Poznyak (2015): Birmingham County Court, Chancery
Dispute between two former cohabitees regarding two properties owned by Elizabeth’s client. Elizabeth successfully argued on behalf of the owner that the claim should be dismissed and a costs order made against the Defendant.
Radford v. Gwilliam (2009): Birmingham County Court, Chancery Business.
Dispute between parents and their daughter and son-in-law as to ownership of property. The parents had invested the proceeds of sale of their home in constructing an annex to a property owned by their daughter and son-in-law. The parties then fell out.
The parents brought a claim based on constructive trust and/or proprietary estoppel on the basis that they had a beneficial interest in the property or alternatively were entitled to compensation for the amount they had spent. The Court found for the parents and awarded them a lump sum in compensation.
Dowson v. Riley (2009): Leeds County Court, Chancery Business.
Representing male partner in a dispute concerning the former matrimonial home, a farm. Property purchased by the couple as joint tenants. Entirety of purchase monies, however, provided by the female partner’s father. Matter settled by consent.
Shaw v. McCormack (2007 -2008): High Court.
Representing female partner in successful application for a freezing order against the male partner in respect of the proceeds of sale of the parties’ former home. Male partner subsequently “disappearing”. Successful TLATA proceedings in respect of the proceeds of sale.
Bland v. Clapham (2006):
Representing elderly couple seeking a declaration of a beneficial interest in a property owned by their daughter and son-in-law. Daughter and son-in-law divorced and son-in-law denied that the parents had any interest in the property. The parents had sold their previous home. The proceeds of sale were invested in the property and the father, a retired builder, had constructed an extension at the property and other improvements. Settled by consent.
General Editor of Cohabitation Law and Precedents (Sweet and Maxwell)
Cohabitation and Trusts of Land (Sweet and Maxwell) (3rd ed) 2016
Cohabitation and Trusts of Land (Sweet and Maxwell) (2nd ed) 2010
Cohabitation and Trusts of Land (Sweet and Maxwell) (1st ed) 2007
Financial Provision in Family Matters (Wildblood and Eaton) (Contributor)
Website and blog: www.elizabethdarlington.co.uk
Elizabeth is regularly invited to speak at conferences and to give presentations for various bodies, including the FLBA, Whitepaper Conferences; Law Societies, CLT, Connect2Law and in-house for solicitors firms.
Recent seminars include:
May 2016: Whitepaper conference in Manchester: Schedule 1 and applications under ToLATA
November 2015: Speaker at 1 Garden Court seminar at Middle Temple, London on cohabitation.
November 2013: FLBA seminar at the LSE: guest speaker on cohabitation.
“Meticulous in her preparation of cases."Legal 500 (2011)
‘Extremely good with clients, putting them at ease.’Legal 500 (2016)