Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

trusts law > Trust Cheat sheet - Sheet1 > Flashcards

Trust Cheat sheet - Sheet1 Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
Civil Procedure 1L flashcards MBE flashcards MPRE flashcards
1
Q

Case Name

A

Principle

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Crabb v Arun

A

PE allowed if supported by later conduct that is unequivocal - Words of conduct

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Bibby v Sterling

A

Acquiescence PE - Must it have been obvious when action was made that they thought they had a
proprietary claim

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Thorner v Major

A

Should be considered on the relationship of the two parties - retrospective context

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Common Expectation

A

consistent dealing, reasonable expectation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Imperfect Gift

A

Intimate relationship, legitimate expectation. Unconscionable not to perfect

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Acquiescence

A

Acting to detriment in mistaken belief of interest

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Re Hay’s

A

trustee not bound to exercise mere power

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Paul v Constance

A

no need for explicit words or even knowledge - common intention

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Sprange v Barnard

A

Money left divided between beneficiaries is seen as gift not trust binding on the donee

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Mussorie Bank v Raynor

A

Intention and Subject should be examined together as a serious settlor would be precise

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Boyce v Boyce

A

Conditions that now can’t be met by one beneficiary can extinguish gift to other beneficiaries

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Lehman Bros

A

Need for property to attach to

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Re Golay’s Will Trusts

A

Sufficient certainty - reasonable income was found to be certain enough - “effective determinant”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Re Tuck Settlements

A

Trust can become certain if someone is appointed to decide on the beneficiary
if the appointed person is ready and willing to resolve the doubt or difficulty

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Re London Wines

A

Segregation in order to be certain of assets - Wine bottles not certain. Which Wine bottle??

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Re Goldcorp Exchange

A

Even where assets are identical, they must be segregated

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Hunter v Moss

A

Are shares truly fungible - Same Class of Shares, Same company

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Palmer v Simmonds

A

Bulk of Residuary - uncertain

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Re Osoba

A

Purpose when gift is given to beneficiaryis treated as merely a statement of the testator’s motive in
making the gift

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Re Astor

A

Purpose Trust - Not supported if not charitable

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

Re Endacott

A

Non Charitable Purpose trust - Limited - Useful Memorial

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

Re Denley

A

Purpose Trust - Indirect benefit of indidual(s) - Question of facts - justifiability

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

Re Hooper

A

Maintenance of Graves - Allowed - must not interfere with perpetuity

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

General principle on pets

A

Pets usually not allowed - Enforceability

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

Pettingall v Pettingall

A

Maintenance of Horse was allowed - legatee could enforce

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

Re Dean

A

Re Dean - Allowed for horse - Because residuary afterwards would be dealt with on discretion
- therefore beneficiary - enforced by Re Thompson Fox Hunting case

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

Re Coulthurst

A

Relief of Poverty - persons who have to go short - widowed women and orphans s3(1) CA

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

Re Compton

A

Relief of Poverty

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
30
Q

Re Shaw

A

Increase in knowledge not object unless alongside education or teaching

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
31
Q

Re Gulbenkian’s

A

matter of construction whether the power is a mere power or a trust power and the use of inappropriate
language is not decisive’.
Common sense approach to intention
Any given individual - is or is not part of the class test

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
32
Q

Morice v Bishop of Durham

A

Beneficiary Principle

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
33
Q

Re Benjamin

A

Benjamin Order - remedy for uncertainty of object
Other remedies include:
Missing beneficiary insurance: Evans v Westcombe [1999] 2 A11 ER 777.
Seek indemnity from other bfs
Pay bf’s share into court

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
34
Q

Re Baden

A

any employees or relatives - sufficiently certain
is there conceptual uncertainty - reinforced is or is not test but could not be applied the exact same way as Gulbenkian

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
35
Q

Contrast certainty of object cases

A

Re Sayer - Empowered to make payments - X
Re Saxone - Discretion be applicable - Yes
Disposition for employees

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
36
Q

R v District Auditor

A

All or some inhabitants - void, unworkability - Meaning clear but far too wide

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
37
Q

McPhail v Doulton

A

Is or is not - distinguished between conceptual uncertainty

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
38
Q

Taylor v Taylor

A

Must be Evidenced in writing, not necessarily be made in writing

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
39
Q

Parker

A

Not applicable to constructive or resulting

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
40
Q

Rochefoucauld

A

Can be used as evidence of fraud

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
41
Q

Grey v IRC

A

Oral disposition void for want of writing

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
42
Q

Hudson v Hathaway

A

Email acceptable

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
43
Q

Akers v Samba

A

Bonafide Purchaser

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
44
Q

Re Rose

A

If donor has done all in their power, equity will complete the transfer - Constructive trust

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
45
Q

Re Lysaght

A

Trust will not fail for want of a trustee

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
46
Q

Milroy v Lord

A

Must Complete legal requirements to transfer, equity will not perfect an imperfect gift

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
47
Q

Pennington

A

Equity will complete if unconscionable not to do so

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
48
Q

Paul v Constance

A

Self declaration of trust

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
49
Q

Musset v Bingle

A

Life + 21 years

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
50
Q

Statutory - Perpetuities and Accumulation Act 2009

A

125 Years

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
51
Q

Re Hooper

A

As long as the law permits - allowed

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
52
Q

Pirbright v Salwey

A

As long as the law allows - allowed

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
53
Q

Re Beloved Wilkes Charity

A

No duty to give reasons for exercises of discretion

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
54
Q

Scott v National Trust

A

Duty to act in good faith
Inform themselves - take advice but not delegate discretion to anyone else, not even an expert

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
55
Q

Re Hays

A

Duty to consider exercising power, but no duty

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
56
Q

Luke v South Kensington

A

Unanimous

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
57
Q

Grand View Private Trust Co Ltd v Wong

A

Not be used for improper purpose

58
Q

O’Rourke

A

Duty to show beneficiaries trust documents

59
Q

Re Beloved Wilkes Charity

A

No duty to give reasons for exercises of discretion

60
Q

Re Londonderry

A

Can redact or withhold if the documents might show their reasons

61
Q

Bartlett v barclays

A

Higher Duty of care imposed on experts than the ordinary statutory duty, Trustee Act 2000

62
Q

Sch 2(7) TA 2000

A

Settlors can limit duty of care or relieve

63
Q

If trustee has a trust power they have a duty

A

Duty to exercise discretion

64
Q

Barclays v Quistclose

A

Primary and secondary - First for borrower Second for the lender - Discouraged widely

65
Q

Cooper + Carreras

A

Both give support to a purpose trust view

66
Q

Carreras - Gerard McCormack

A

Criticised as it ignores provision of preference under s239(4)(b) Insolvency Act Acts done within 6 months of insolvency are invalidated if they have the effect of giving preference to creditors
- However, Payments made under pressure were not held invalid as pressure removes intention to prefer

67
Q

Twinsectra

A

Millet Resulting Trust for the benefit of the lender - No intention to create a trust where typically you are searching for an intention,
previously suggested it could be an express trust.
Seemingly applies that the priority crediting in the case of administration is the
subject of the trust
Borrower has power or duty to apply the money according to the lenders instructions. Lender is settlor and beneficiary in the situation?

68
Q

Nathalie Koh Jia En Critique on Millets view

A

Lowers the threshold for finding intention to retain beneficial interest and fails to accurately locate the beneficial interest

69
Q

Millet’s comparison to the resulting trust

A

Millet likens the resulting trust to a ‘retention of title’ (Romalpa) clause, money is still owned by the lender but the beneficiary has use of it only so far as its
necessary for the purpose. Not a positive intention to retain interest but a negative intention to not give up the interest

70
Q

Lady Arden on quistclose

A

Fusionist - Dont fall neatly into any

71
Q

What rivals Trust relationship

A

Loan Contraact rivals trust relationship

72
Q

Solicitors for quistclose

A

Solicitors involved - You would hope the word trust is included - Intention is more clear

73
Q

Prickly Bay

A

No segregation, High Interest Rate - Arden suggests other legal relationship

74
Q

s214 Insolvency Act

A

discretion to declare that a director is liable to make a contribution to the company’s assets where the company has gone into insolvent liquidation

75
Q

Arguments for Mandatory registration of trust

A

Willingness of lender to make loans
Chilling effect for businesses that rely on lending

76
Q

ARguments Against

A

Too Many transactions get caught

77
Q

Penn v Lord Baltimore

A

Court can order specific performance

78
Q

American Cyanamid v Ethicon

A

Court can grant injunction - violated patent

79
Q

Lawrence v Fen Tigers

A

Damages in lieu awardable

80
Q

Recission

A

Mistake - Pitt
Voluntary Dispositions
Misrepresentations - Damages in lieu of recission

81
Q

Davies v Ford

A

Substitutive and Reparative compensation allowed - Substitutive is controversial

82
Q

AIB + Brudenell

A

support for reparative comp. Substitutive support depends on interpretation

83
Q

Bartlett

A

Consequential gain can offset consequential loss

84
Q

Defences to personal claims

A

Exclusion clauses
Consent/Waiver
s61 Trustee Act 1925 - honestly, reasonably and ought fairly to be excused
Wholly or partly

85
Q

Armitage v Nurse

A

Court has discretion on limitation clauses

86
Q

Re Paulings

A

Requires free consent from beneficiaries

87
Q

Extinguishing Personal Property Interest

A

Terms of trust
BFP - Papadimitriou

88
Q

Extinguishing Land Interest

A

Overreaching s2 LPA
Registrable Disposition s29 LRA 2002

89
Q

Tracing is possible in

A

Sufficient connection to property
Simple Substitutions
Sales
Insurance Policies

90
Q

SGA s17 and 18

A

Title of property often passes before payment

91
Q

Sales - Serious Fraud Office v Hotel Portfolio II

A

Can trace into property bought using breached trust money

92
Q

Foskett v McKeown

A

Can trace into life insurance and then the payout where payments are made with trust money in breach of trust

93
Q

Brazil v Durant

A

Generally no backwards tracing unless ‘close transactional link’

94
Q

Relfo v Varsani

A

Or if they were transferred on the basis that trust funds would replace assets

95
Q

Re Hallet

A

Expenditure can be treated as trustees and money remaining can be traced into

96
Q

Re Oatway

A

Expenditure can be treated as trust money and can trace into the asset bought

97
Q

Cherrypicking

A

Choosing whether to apply Oatway or Hallet

98
Q

Roscoe v Winder

A

the claimants cannot claim for more than the lowest balance in the account at any point of time

99
Q

Clayton’s case

A

First in First out when two beneficiaries are involved

100
Q

Byers v SNB

A

requirement of continuing proprietary interest - Remedy is as if the D was a trustee

101
Q

Akindele

A

Sufficient degree of culpability - unconscionable

102
Q

Agip

A

For their own use or benefit

103
Q

Williams v Bank of Nigeria

A

Remedies unclear except for obiter - seems to restore assets

104
Q

Royal Brunei v Tan

A

Breaches legal duty - culpability is unnecessary

105
Q

Requirement for Dishonest assistance

A

Defendant dishonestly assists

106
Q

Brinnks v Abu Saleh

A

Not nominal assistance

107
Q

Group Seven v Notable Services

A

Make it easier than it would have been

108
Q

Novoship

A

Remedy = disgorge them of profits

109
Q

Ottaway v Norman

A

Intention to create an obligation
Communication of intention
Acceptance of that obligation

110
Q

Blackwell

A

Outside the wills act

111
Q

Re Snowden

A

Outside the will

112
Q

Constructive Trust

A

Action + Reliance
OR

113
Q

Express Trust

A

Intention not expressed in will format (s9 Wills Act) + Fraud = Trust

114
Q

Blackwell

A

Goes against

115
Q

McCormick

A

Fraudulent to go against the will, Fraudulent if the trustee of the secret trust goes against the wishes of the settlor

116
Q

Vandervell

A

Presumed - Circumstances where transferror did not intend to make a gift
Automatic - Dispositive provisions in trust fail

117
Q

LPA s60(3)

A

Conveyance shall not be merely implied

118
Q

Stack v Dowden

A

Family home determined on Constructive Trust

119
Q

Equality Act s199

A

Presumption of advancement is abolished - husband making gift to wife if transfers property

120
Q

Tinsley v Milligan

A

Not relying on illegality but merely the presumption

121
Q

Mirza

A

Does denying the claim furtehr the purpose of fraud
Public Policy interest
Proportionality

122
Q

Westdeutsche

A

transferor intended the transferee to become absolute owner. The bank could only recover its money with simple interest as it only has a personal claim.

123
Q

Re Rose

A

Once a trustee has done everything they are required to do

124
Q

Pallant v Morgan

A

co-operative acquisitions. Constructive trust arises and held for both parties

125
Q

Fraud - Bailey v Angove

A

Fraudster holds property on CT for the victim - provides following and tracing remedies - proprietary

126
Q

Westdeustche

A

Stolen money is traceable in equity

127
Q

Polly Peck

A

Remedial - award for legal action held on CT

128
Q

Judicature Acts

A

Administrative Fusion

129
Q

way forward

A

Substantive Fusion

130
Q

Maxim on intention

A

Equity looks to the substance (intention) rather than the form

131
Q

maxim on law

A

Equity Follows the law

132
Q

maxim on priority

A

Where equities are equal the first in time prevails

133
Q

Maxim on illegality

A

He who comes into equity must come with clean hands

134
Q

Maxim on constitution

A

Equity looks on as done that which ought to be done

135
Q

Penn v Lord Baltimore (1750) 1 Ves.Sen. 444

A

Equity acts in personam

136
Q

Maxim on voluntary

A

Equity will not assist a volunteer

137
Q

Subrin

A

Equity “fills in the gaps” of common law

138
Q

In equity,

A

Promises binding without the need for consideration

139
Q

Atiyah

A

Needless to have two complex doctrines where both operate to bind agreements and promises

140
Q

Millet

A

seek the same result… but do not… draw the lines in the same place

141
Q

Judicature Acts

A

Common law was to say the law had its roots in the common law courts/ Equity has its roots in the courts of chancery
Merge the courts

trusts law (3 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions