Property Law - Rochefoucauld and Pallant Flashcards
What might apply in a case like Smith v Matthews where A declares himself T?
Proprietary estoppel
Two advantages of seeing R v B as a CT?
Allows direct reliance on s.53(1)(2) LPA and no one could have acted as S anyway in R v B for ET
What is the Disapplication thesis?
Court disapplies statute formalities if there is fraud - merely a rule of proof
What is required to rely on Rochefoucauld v Boustead?
T knew property conveyed to him as a T, and T denies trust anyway and claims the land
Lincoln v Wright
Equity of redemption to beneficiary of entire estate
Gardner v Rowe
Trust from moment of declaration
With what other CT does Youdan draw comparison to determine that need knowledge of trust existence before T receives land for Rochefoucauld to apply?
Fully secret trusts
London & Regional v TBI judgment
No claim under Pallant if agreed not to be bound until formal context
Option to purchase
Holiday Inns v Broadhead
Youdan on requirements for Rochefoucauld
Need to receive property and perhaps also know of trust existence before receipt
Five features of Pallant
Agreement precedes acquisition, not necessarily contractually enforceable, understood to get interest if B succeeds, A suffers detriment OR B acquires advantage in relation to acquisition AND inequitable
What case shows the subject matter division under Pallant if there is no agreement between the parties?
Holiday Inns v Broadhead
S.2 LP(MP)A 1989
Contract sale/disposition of interest in land, signed by both parties
Bannister v Bannister judgment
Beneficial interest and CT - no need to state trust, just shown in substance from terms
What would R v B be an example of if it were considered an ET, and dutch company the S?
A tripartite case, allowing C to enforce the agreement
Who showed no one could have been the S anyway In R v B?
Liew
Elderly woman rent free
Bannister v Bannister
Bannister v Bannister general
Elderly woman rent free
Pallant v Morgan general
Auction
Banner Homes on agreement Pallant
Shares in JV company, NOT land
Hodgson v Marks judgment
RT
Wife husband raise mortgage
Re Duke of Marlborough
Why does Lieu find the Disapplication thesis unworkable?
Treats fraud as a prerequisite to the trust, but R v B suggests trust is a prerequisite
Hodgson v Marks general
Lodger
What was imposed in Birch v Blagrave and Childers v Childers, if not R v B?
RT
How should the formality rules be perceived, in regard to their aims?
A means to an end - they are a way to achieve their aims, not the end of the discussion
De Bruyne v De Bruyne general
As to AM, children but wife
What thesis argues R v B is an express trust?
Disapplication thesis
What academic is against three party R v B cases?
Feltham
What two cases show R v B does not apply if B does not promise to hold on trust?
Birch v Blagrave and Childers v Childers
What two cases show CT operating to give B more than they had at the outset?
Lincoln v Wright; Rochefoucauld
Requirements for proprietary estoppel
B detrimentally relied on A’s promise
Mirror agreement in Pallant
Time Products v Combined English Stores
what are the four aims of formality requirements?
Channelling, cautionary, evidentiary and protective
Three reasons why CT should be preferred to RT, if possible
CT reflects the full facts, no resalire (just enforcing whatever B promised) and can’t explain getting more than at the outset under RT
Rochefoucauld v Boustead general
Mortgage, Auction, sold
Who gives four aims of formality requirements?
Feltham