Three Certainty Cases Flashcards
Lambe v Eames
1871 - ‘to be at her disposal any way she wishes’
Not sufficient, absolute gift
Re Diggles
1888 - ‘Desire’ failed intention
Re Hamilton
1895 - ‘wish’ failed intention
Adams v Kensington Vestry
1884 “in full confidence she will do what’s right with the disposal thereof”
Too vague intention for trust, absolute gift
Comiskey v bowring hanbury
(1905) “in full confidence” but clear intention throughout whole document to set up trust.
Equity looks to intention rather than form
Barclays Bank v Quistclose
(1970) - commercial context of intention,
Both parties intended on trust
Anthony v Donges
(1998) “such minimal part of my estate as she may be entitled too for maintenance purposes”
FAILED, no certainty of subject matter
Kolab
(1962) - blue chip securities , too ambiguous subject matter
Not sufficient
Re Golay
(1965) “reasonable” word sufficient for subject matter [policy overtone for court]
Palmer v simmonds
“Bulk” of estate to relatives on death
Not sufficient subject matter > too ambiguous
Sprange v Barnard
(1789) - stock to h for sole use and remainder to be equally divided,
INVALID REMAINDER CLAUSE, subject matter too vague
Re Last
1968 - estate to brother and “at his death anything that is left that came from me is to pass too ……”
Not valid, successive interest trust, brother died intestate > couldn’t pass onto anyone else
Re London Wine Company
1986 - couldn’t specify bottles exactly, uncertain , unallocated, subject matter
Re goldthorpe
Unacertained bullion, not specific so can’t be certain of subject matter
Hunter v Moss
1994 - intangible items eg) Shares
Okay to say 50 unspecified shares out of 950 as long as all shares identified