1. The Three Certainties Flashcards
Lambe v Eames
Change of approach by courts - lean against finding a trust
Re Kayford
No need for word ‘trust’ to be used
Re Adams and the Kensington Vestry
‘In full confidence’ - no trust
Comiskey v Bowring-Hanbury
‘In full confidence’ + ‘I hereby direct’ - trust imposed
Re Hamilton
Judges have considerable discretion in interpreting words within the context
Paul v Constance
Intention to create trust through numerous conversations and conduct
Azam v Uwbal
No trust where payee intended debtor-creditor relationship and T is free to mix the money with his own
Re Lewis’s of Leicester
But possible for T to mix received moneys with moneys of others in the case of a mixed fund, where the segregated and mixed fund is held as a pooled investments on trust for payers and in proportionate co-owned shares
Sprange v Barnard
‘Remaining part of what is left’ at the time of widower’s death is insufficiently certain to create a trust
Palmer v Simmonds
‘The bulk of my estate’ is insufficiently certain for trust to arise
Re London Wine
Buyers of wine stored in warehouse it could not establish a trust of specific bottle, as bottles had not been segregated
Re Goldcorp Exchange
No trust for purchasers of bullion who had paid for it but not taken it away - apart from those whose bullion had been segregated
Hunter v Moss
Trust is established when M orally declares himself T of 5% of shares issued in a company
Re Golay’s Will Trusts
‘One of my flats’
‘Reasonable income’
Not void for want of certainty of subject-matter
Morice v Bishop of Durham
Trust must be for ascertainable beneficiaries
Re Gulbenkian’s Settlement Trusts
Establishes ‘in/out’ test
Public Trustee v Butler
‘Deserving’ uncertain
‘Promising’ not uncertain
IRC v Broadway Cottages
Test for a fixed interest is the ‘fixed list’, i.e. it must be possible to draw up a complete list of all beneficiaries
McPhail v Doulton
HL adopts less strict approach for discretionary trusts
Conceptual certainty
But no need for evidential certainty
Re Baden’s Deed Trusts (No 2)
‘Relatives’ sufficiently certain
Ex parte West Yorkshire Metropolitan Council
Class of potential beneficiaries was ‘the inhabitants of West Yorkshire’
Ignoring question of conceptual clarity, this is how to be administratively unworkable and hence invalid
Re Barlow’s WT
‘Friends’ too vague a class to give rise to a discretionary trust - instead gives rise to gift subject to a condition precedent
