Implied Trusts Flashcards
What is a resulting trust?
Even though the legal title is in someone else’s name, the equitable title springs back to the person who first owned the money.
When do Automatic Resulting Trusts (ARTS) arise?
Re Vandervell’s- arise by operation of law, do not depend on intention.
Presumed Intention Resulting Trusts
Conduct of the parties indicate a presumption a RT was intended
3 circumstances when a RT arises upon transfers on trust
- Failure of intended express trust
- Incomplete disposal of beneficial interest (no certainty of objects)
- trustees take with no beneficial interests declared
Essey v Cowlard
Showed failure of express trusts leads to RT
Re Cochran
Bad drafting so didn’t know who beneficiaries were
Re Trusts Abbott fund
Money donated after the ladies died
Re Gillingham
Donations after bus crash, excess money returned
Re Vinogradoff
Grandmother put her money in joint name with granddaughter. When she died, 4yr Granddaughter became the trustee.
S.60(3) LPA
In a voluntary conveyance of land, don’t presume there is a RT because it doesn’t say it’s an outright gift
Hodgson v Marks
S.60(3) was shown. Luckily, there was enough evidence to presume a RT
Parrot v Parkin
Parkin held the yacht on RT for Parrot who had bought it for Parkin when they were in a relationship.
Curley v Parkes
Presumption of RT proportionate to parties contributions.
Lasker v Lasker
RT still relevant when buying investments
Marr v Collie
Privy council said you should use constructive trust approach in commercial and domestic relationships.
Presumption of advancement
Father of child- yes (Crabb v Crabb)
Person in place of parent- yes (Bennet v Bennet)
Lasker- presumption applied but gets weaker as child gets older
Husband to wife- yes
Wife to husband- no
Patel v Mirza- what 3 considerations are made before looking at evidence for presumption of advancement
- Purpose of prohibition
- Effects to public policy
- Apply with a sense of proportionality
Constructive Trusts
When it’s unconscionable for the person who holds the legal title not to hold the property on trust for another person
Every effort rule
Pennington and Wayne
Re Rose
Pallant v Morgan
2 businessmen bidding for the same thing. One let the other win so they could do a deal themselves. Held to be a constructive trust.
CICT of the family home
Petit v Petit- courts cannot re-allocate property (except from in divorce cases)
Burns v Burns- cohabiting couple who split up. Had made no financial contributions and title in partners name. No claim.
Essential requirements of a CICT
Common intention plus detrimental reliance (Lloyds Bank v Rosset)
2 steps of whether there is a CICT
- Is there a CICT claim?
- If so, what is the size of the claim?
Express CT
Eves v Eves- was not on title as they were too young
O’Neil v Holland- told partner they wouldn’t get mortgage so put house in one name.
