Artist’s High Court claim that ex gave her £1.5m house via WhatsApp would set frightening precedent says leading law firm

An artist’s High Court claim that her ex-husband transferred his share in a £1.5 million house by WhatsApp would set a frightening precedent if successful, warns leading law firm, Nockolds, in the following update

As reported in The Telegraph, although Ms Lin was awarded the house in their divorce, unbeknown to her, Mr Gudmundsson had been made bankrupt a week earlier, eliminating her chance of receiving his share.

The basis for her claim is a WhatsApp exchange, which took place prior to the bankruptcy order, in which the husband said: “I suggest that the responsibility for taking care of the kids goes to u 100%, then I can sign over my share of Southcote Road to u without any complications as I don’t need any accommodation in London.” In a subsequent message, he added: “Please let me know that u r happy with this and we can then close the financial part of the divorce this week,” with Ms Lin replying, “with some monthly maintenance then ok.”

Nockolds says that the case highlights the growing challenge for courts in an age where informal digital communications are increasingly scrutinised as evidence of intention.

Lynn Cowley, Partner at Nockolds, the law firm, says:

“If such a challenge were upheld, it would set a frightening precedent. Allowing an informal WhatsApp message to be treated as conveying an interest in land would undermine the certainty provided by formalities.”

“It has long been recognised that beneficial interests can be transferred by act and intention, but the courts demand clear evidence. A vague digital message is likely to fall short of the statutory safeguards designed to protect certainty in land law.”

“The real concern is not that digital communications replace formal completion, but that they could inadvertently be treated as having the same effect. That risk is what makes this challenge unsettling.”

An artist’s High Court claim that her ex-husband transferred his share in a £1.5 million house by WhatsApp would set a frightening precedent if successful, warns Nockolds, the leading law firm.

As reported in The Telegraph, although Ms Lin was awarded the house in their divorce, unbeknown to her, Mr Gudmundsson had been made bankrupt a week earlier, eliminating her chance of receiving his share.

The basis for her claim is a WhatsApp exchange, which took place prior to the bankruptcy order, in which the husband said: “I suggest that the responsibility for taking care of the kids goes to u 100%, then I can sign over my share of Southcote Road to u without any complications as I don’t need any accommodation in London.” In a subsequent message, he added: “Please let me know that u r happy with this and we can then close the financial part of the divorce this week,” with Ms Lin replying, “with some monthly maintenance then ok.”

Nockolds says that the case highlights the growing challenge for courts in an age where informal digital communications are increasingly scrutinised as evidence of intention.

Lynn Cowley, Partner at Nockolds, the law firm, says:

“If such a challenge were upheld, it would set a frightening precedent. Allowing an informal WhatsApp message to be treated as conveying an interest in land would undermine the certainty provided by formalities.”

“It has long been recognised that beneficial interests can be transferred by act and intention, but the courts demand clear evidence. A vague digital message is likely to fall short of the statutory safeguards designed to protect certainty in land law.”

“The real concern is not that digital communications replace formal completion, but that they could inadvertently be treated as having the same effect. That risk is what makes this challenge unsettling.”