conveyed as a trustee, and who knows it was so conveyed, to deny the trust and claim the land himself’. Section 53(1)(b) of the Law of Property Act 1925 provides that ‘a declaration of trust respecting any land or any interest therein must be manifested and proved by some writing signed by some person who is able to declare such trust or by his will’. S53(1)(b) indicates that in cases where there is a purported oral declaration of trust, it is not void without the element of writing, but merely unenforceable
Essay Question: “My Lords, there are two issues in this appeal. The first is concerned with the nature of the so-called “Quistclose trust” and the requirements for its creation. The second arises only if the first is answered adversely to the appellant. It is whether his conduct renders him liable for having assisted in a breach of trust.” Lord Millett in Twinsectra Ltd v Yardley and Others [2002] 2 AC 164 at paragraph 52. Critically analyse Lord Millett’s views on the two issues referred
The modern trust law has its origin in the use (from the Latin ab apus) which was developed as the response of equity to the shortcomings of the common law. A trust is very difficult if not impossible to define, but its essential elements are reasonably easily described and readily understood. There is no statutory definition of a trust . It has been the courts that, over the years, have developed the rules relating to the trust, so all one can do is provide a description of the trust, which reflects
The general rule on constitution of trusts is ‘equity will not assist a volunteer to perfect an imperfect trust’. It is apparent that subsequent case law has sought to depart from such principle by introducing various exceptions which allow incomplete gifts to be perfected. Nevertheless, there has been many criticism and debate in regards to this area of the law since it is felt on the one hand, that the scope is for exceptions is being widened too far, whilst it is argued on the other that it will
classification is necessary to aid attempts to bring order to a confusing and confused area of law. If the events from which non-consensual property rights arise can be classified, then the law’s response is more likely to be consistent and coherent. Yet there are problems. The very nature of the facts that are brought before courts in the sorts of cases that comprise this area of law demand fairness, and legal policy considerations lurk behind every rationalisation. This
living is appropriate to him When it comes to jacks claim under Holders will. Holder whispered to Reddick that the £30,000 he left him in his will was for Jacks University. This shows Holders intention to establish a secret trust. For a secret trust to be valid there are certain requirements that have to be fulfilled intention, communication and acceptance this will be discussed in more depth
Secret trusts arise where a testator explains to X that they want property to be held on trust for Y and then leaves the property to X in their Will. It is also possible that a secret trust arises where in reliance on a promise to implement the trust by X, no Will is made (Strickland v Aldridge 1804 9 Ves 516 REF1). The onus of proving a secret trust is on the person claiming that it exists, on the balance of probabilities - the 'ordinary civil standard of proof' (Re Snowden 1979 3 All ER 172 REF2)
circumstances in which a fiduciary relationship would arise include: A. Undertaking of trust and confidence Mostly, fiduciary relationships involve an agreement where one party accepts from another on trust, the exercise of a power or discretion over his or her interests. The agreement does not need to be contractual. The key criterion is whether ‘one party is reasonably entitled to repose and does repose trust and confidence in another’. That is when any particular aspect of the agreement gives
trustees make a contract with a stranger to the trust, that contract is not entered into on behalf of the trust beneficiaries and does not bind them, it binds the trustees themselves. The question whether the trustees are allowed to use the trust assets to perform the contract depends on the terms of the trust. A knowing receipt claim arise when that stranger directly or indirectly receives for his own benefit trust property transferred in breach of trust, in certain circumstances where he is enriched
Blackwell v Blackwell, that is connected to the principle of Secret Trusts and particularly Half Secret Trusts. In order for the principle to be understood, it is significant to expatiate on what secret trusts are and the several laws revolving around them. In general terms, a secret trust arises where a testator, A, tells B that he is leaving property to B on his death, and that he wishes B to hold it on trust for C, even though no trust for C has been set out in any formal will executed by A. If B agrees