Trusts 2 - Charitable + Trusts of the Family Home

Question 1

Purpose trust

Answer 1

• Same formalities

Beneficiary principle - require they directly benefit individuals.

Perpetuities - inalienability of capital.

Still need
Intention
Subject matter
Objects
Beneficiary principle
Perpetuities
Formalities - if land s53(1)(b).

Question 2

Perpetuity

Answer 2

Must state
-no more than 21 years
-trustees may spend and end trust at any time.

Question 3

Charitable trusts

Answer 3

Exempt on beneficiary and perpetuity.

CA 2011-
trust must be for charitable purpose
must have sufficient public benefit
must be exclusively charitable

Trust must seek to attain these purposes;
prevention of poverty
advancement of education
advancement of religion

Public benefit -
identifiable benefit
must accrue to public or sufficiently large section of public.

Relief of poverty -
can be ‘my family’

Religion -
if open to all
live in the world and mix with citizens

Education and other purposes -
people linked to particular individual or company not large enough.

‘Class within a class’ -
can be limited so long as legitimate, proprotiioante, rational or justified given nature of trust.

Must not exclude the poor.

Exclusively charitable -
not have political purpose
if fees, must be ploughed back into the purpose not to individuals.

Question 4

Non-charitable purpose trusts

Answer 4

Re Denley trust -
identifies people who will benefit from particular purpose
a) must be sufficiently clear and give rise to sufficient tangible benefit
b) persons who stand to benefit from carrying out of purpose must be ascertainable (given postulant and conceptually certain)
c) not offend inalienability of capital (21 years)

Imperfect obligation -
Animals and tombs.
Valid but unenforceable.
Settlor can claim themselves (if alive).
No inalienability of capital.

Question 5

Resulting trusts

Answer 5

Presumption-
voluntary transfer of personality.
presumption will arise.

Can be rebutted by evidence of actual intention.

Land -
not presumed same way. Need extra evidence e.g. voluntary transfer between strangers.

Contribute towards purchase price. Proportionate to size of contributions.
Contribution must be;
Contemporaneous with the purchase
directed towards actual purchase itself.

Presumption of advancement
(no resulting trust implied).
father to child
person in loco parentis to child
by husband to wife
fiance to fiancee (so long as they marry).

Presumptions can be rebutted. By intention at time of transfer or before.

Question 6

Automatic resulting trust

Answer 6

Bare trust to settlor.
trust does not dispose of equitable interest.

Question 7

Formality

Answer 7

None.
Even in land

Question 8

Ownership of family home

Answer 8

Joint tenants
Tenants in common

Should evidence beneficial interest in writing.

Married - court decides
Unmarried - usual principles.

Question 9

Resulting trust of family home

Answer 9

Only contributions towards purchase price count.

At time of purchase

Monetary contributions.

Question 10

Common intention constructive trust

Answer 10

Equity follows law.
Presumed contribution equal.

If want to argue bigger share.
Common intention and relied on agreement to their detriment;
a) Partner came to clear agreement
b) detrimental reliance
c) require evidence intended to share unequally and so acted to their detriment. ‘Whole course of dealing’

Whole course of dealing;
advice or discussions
reason transferred into joint names
nature of relationship
whether they had children
how purchase was financed
how partners arranged
how discharged outgoings.

hard to displace equal.

Question 11

Solely owned by one partner

Answer 11

If one sole legal owner onus on them to prove they have beneficial entitlement.

Stage 1 - Establish trust -
-common intention
-claiming partner acted on detriment in reliance.

If express claiming partner shows acted to detriment or significalntly altered their position.

or

Inferred common intention + detrimental reliance.
-by purchase price or contributions to mortgage.

Quanitying shares -
in contrast to joint homes no presumption of shares.

Court will award what it considers fair.

Question 12

Proprietary estoppel

Answer 12

Where unconscionable to go back on promise

Assurance
Active or passive

Detriment
Must outweigh benefits

Reliance-
Assurance and detriment connected.

Remedies
transfer of ownership
grant of a lease
rights of occupancy
financial compensation
beneficial share in home