Trusts Group 2 invert

Question 1

Conceptual uncertainty can be cured by designated 3p’s opinion
(jewish faith & rabbi – obiter)

Answer 1

Re Tuck’s WT

Question 2

Bare POWER given to individual can only be used by him

Answer 2

Re Harding

Question 3

If B’ees = sui Juris & all agree then can end or vary a Trust w/out T’ee consent

Answer 3

Saunders v Vautier

Question 4

Crt cannot give consent of B’ees who are outside S.1(1)(b) Variation Trust Act 57

Answer 4

Knocker v Yule

Question 5

Benefit – Denning declared benefit doesn’t have to be solely financial

Answer 5

Re Weston

Question 6

Benefit – forfeiture clause – roman catholics – If benefit to one group of B’ees only, crt will allow if more than only financial benefits exist – freedom of religion, freedom of spouse, family harmony

Answer 6

Re Remnant

Question 7

Benefit – if variation includes possible risk of less benefit – crt will allow variation for minors if a sui juris adult would have accepted the risk

Answer 7

Re Cohen 59

Question 8

Benefit – must be for all B’ees for crt to approve variation

Answer 8

Re Cohen 65

Question 9

Benefit – look to selfish reasons – If reasons to vary = financial benefit ONLY to one side of family, CRT won’t approve variation;

Answer 9

Re Tinker

Question 10

Benefit/crt discretion – Crt looks to give effect to S’or’s intention when asked to Vary a T (farmer, his maid, her brother the twat case)

Answer 10

Re Stead

Question 11

S’or’s instention = irrelevant – Crt speak for those who cannot speak for themselves when deciding whether to vary a T or not.

Answer 11

Goulding v James

Question 12

Allows variation of T for admin purposes

Answer 12

S. 57 (1) Trustees Act

Question 13

Allows variation w/out B’ee consent but only for realty

Answer 13

S. 64 (1) Settled Land Act

Question 14

S.64(1) case – Crt allowed variation to P.T. b/c Marquis was junkie

Answer 14

Hambro v. Duke Marlborough

Question 15

Charitable trusts not need certainty of objects

Answer 15

Morice v Bishop Durham

Question 16

C.T. may be perpetual if properly constructed & inside perpetuity period

Answer 16

Christ’s hospital v Grainger

Question 17

Gift over from one Charity to a non charity defeats perpetual gift over – must be one charity to another

Answer 17

Re Bowen

Question 18

CT not exempt from rule against perpetuity - rule governs remoteness of vesting

Answer 18

Wightwick WT

Question 19

Legal Req’mnt for CT – be for recognisable Charitable Purpose

Answer 19

S.2(2) Charities Act 2006

Question 20

Legal Req’mnt for CT – must be for public benefit

Answer 20

S.3 CA 2006

Question 21

Lord Macnaughten set out 4 heads of charitable purpose

Answer 21

Pemsel’s case

Question 22

CT must benefit public or some part of it;

T. for ‘needy relation’ can = Charitable;

Answer 22

Re Scarisbrick

Question 23

Public ≠ whole community;
Public = part of community;
Benefit = ‘direct’ and ‘indirect’
Exclusion of poor ≠ public benefit
Fee charging ≠ void provided ppl are not excluded b/c cost

Answer 23

Re Resch

Question 24

Rest home for millionaires ≠ Public benefit

Answer 24

Re White’s WT

Question 25

Gift my clearly be for Charitable purpose

Answer 25

Atkinson’t WT

Question 26

If main purpose of gift = charitable, ancillary purpose can be non-charitable

Answer 26

Re Coxen

Question 27

If gift = Charitable AND benevolent then = Charitable

Answer 27

Re Best

Question 28

Charitable AND public = charitable purposes of a public character

Answer 28

Blair v Duncan

Question 29

Charitable AND deserving = Charitable

Answer 29

Sutton

Question 30

Education AND welfare ≠ charitable b/c disjunctive (unclear charity)

Answer 30

Bahamas