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
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
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
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 court held that the mum not leaving anything for her child was unreasonable. The applicant has to show there is reliance and the court takes into account the future financial needs of the applicant, one of which would be Jacks School fees and law school tuition and probably accommodation since it was stated that he is determined to be a barrister. He may have a second claim under this act as any person who immediately before the death of the deceased was being maintained, either wholly or
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)
fraud, and, providing the trust complies with the requisite conditions, unrealistic to uphold a strict reading of statute to allow the trust to fail. As previously stated, another equitable principle says ‘equity follows the law’ – in the event of conflict, equity may circumvent the common law but it does not seek to override it. It only intervenes if there is a risk of an unconscionable result, like the denial of a testator’s wishes. As Hudson notes ‘the purpose of equity is to introduce fairness
Introduction. Equity by its nature is a fluid subject where maxims are simply guidelines to be used or ignored at the whim of the court and solutions to litigation sometimes aim at justice (or expedience) at the expense of the legal rules of equity (equity will [sometimes] follow the law). This is illustrated by the two overarching maxims where equity will not assist a volunteer and equity will not perfect an imperfect gift when in practise there are established systems of equity which often do assist
MERGEFORMAT �1� Property 2 Constitution is the last of the formalities that the law requires to create an effective and enforceable trust. Failure to constitute a trust will mean that no gift or trust is applicable; and the law that relates to perfect constituted gifts and trusts will not be appropriate. Moreover, the axiom of equity will intervene: "equity will not perfect an imperfect gift". The state of equity at the start of 21st century has changed significantly through a number of noteworthy