Certainties Flashcards
What happened in Paul v Constance
A man told his partner, “The money is as much yours as mine.”
He deposited compensation money into a joint account
What principle was established in Paul v Constance regarding intention?
Held: Sufficient intention to create a trust.
Intention can be inferred from conduct and informal words.
No need for legal language — look at context and behaviour.
What happened in Lambe v Eames?
Husband left property to wife “to be at her disposal… for benefit of herself and family.”
Why was there no trust in Lambe v Eames?
The words were precatory (a wish or hope), not imperative.
Held: No trust was created — wife took absolute ownership.
Intention to create a trust must be clear and certain.
What were the facts in Re Goldcorp Exchange Ltd [1995]?
Gold bars held on trust, but no specific bars were allocated.
Gold was part of a general bulk.
Why was there no valid trust in Re Goldcorp?
No certainty of subject matter — unallocated, indistinguishable goods.
For tangible, fungible goods, clear identification is required.
Held: No trust existed.
What happened in Hunter v Moss [1994]?
Trust declared over 50 out of 950 identical shares.
No specification of which 50.
Why was the trust valid in Hunter v Moss despite no allocation?
Shares were intangible and identical.
Specific identification was unnecessary.
Distinguished from Goldcorp (which involved tangible goods).
Held: Valid trust.
What was the issue in McPhail v Doulton [1971]?
Trust for employees and their relatives/dependants.
What test for certainty of objects was established in McPhail v Doulton?
“Is or is not” test: It must be possible to say whether someone is or is not in the class of beneficiaries.
Conceptual certainty is key for discretionary trusts.
Held: Trust valid.
How did Re Baden’s Deed Trusts (No 2) [1973] apply McPhail?
Focused on whether “relatives” and “dependants” were sufficiently certain.
What was the outcome in Re Baden (No 2)?
Judges differed on reasoning, but trust upheld.
Terms used were found to be conceptually certain.
Reinforced “is or is not” test and distinction between:
Conceptual certainty (definition is clear)
Evidential certainty (can we prove someone fits the class?)
