Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

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


See full index

Cases I Need To Know For Equity > General Knowledge > Flashcards

General Knowledge Flashcards

1
Q

Definition of a constructive trust

A

Paragon finance v thakerer 1999

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

Case that gives 2 situations where a constructive trust can arise

A

Lloyds bank v rossett 1990

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

Detriment can include physical renovations

A

Eves v eves 1975

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

Detriment can include bills being paid

A

Grant v Edward’s 1986

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

Recelections of a convo that happens 20 years ago can count as intentional to create a beneficial interest

A

Ungurian v lesnoff 1990

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

Excuses clause example

A

Curran v Collins 2015

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

Conversations should happen at the time of purchase but can happen at a later date

A

Stack v dowden 2007

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

Financial contribution of a gift will suffice

A

Miland bank PLC v Cooke 1995

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

Direct contributions will suffice as intention to create a beneficial interest

A

Oxley v hiscock 2004

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

Religion concerned must have a degree of cognecy, concession, seriousness and importance

A

Scientology decision 1999

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

Which case applied to criteria of the Scientology decision 1999

A

Druid network 2011

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

Old worn out Clarke classed as poverty in need of relief

A

Re gosling 1990

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

Couldn’t distinguish which boys were in poverty and which boys were not so wasn’t clear what was intended for the charity.

A

Re gwynon 1930

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

Borderline case where a chess tournament charity was classed as advancement of education.

A

Re durpress trust 1945

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

Court said the development of the alphabet couldn’t be for the advancement of education.

A

Re shaws will trust 1957

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

Charity for research into works of authors, Court needed evidence they would publish their findings to uphold it as a trust.

A

Re basterman 1980

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

4 Pemsel heads of charity case?

A

Special commission of income tax v pemsel 1891

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

Merits test applied I.e. what merit did the painting have for the general public?

A

Re pinion 1965

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

Public benefit must relate to aims of charity

A

AG v Ross 1986

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

Benefits must be balanced against any detriment or harm.

A

Nation anti-vivisection v IRC 1948

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

2 stage test for public benefit giving public aspect and benefit aspect.

Numerically negligible
Personal nexus Q

A

Oppenheim v tobacco securities trust ltd 1951

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

Private schools must provide support and access to admit non-fee payers to be a charity.

A

R (independent schools council) v charity commission 2012

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

Casual link couldn’t be found between breach and the loss of money. But for test applied.

A

Target holdings v redfern 1995

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

Passive trustee liable for not preventing a breach by other trustee.

A

Bahin v Hughes 1886

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

One party can be ordered to indemnify the other where e.g. wrong advice given.

A

Re partington 1887

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

A trustee who acts in good faith can be rewarded relief under S.61 of trustee act 1925.

A

Re Evan’s 1999

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

Can be excluded for negligence.

A

Speight v guant 1883

28
Q

Cannot exclude for fraud.

A

Armitage v nurse 1998

29
Q

Capacity to make a trust.

A

Re beanley 1978

30
Q

With regards to intention there are no set formula of words you should use.

A

Paul v Constance 1977

31
Q

Word “confidence” can show intention AS LONG AS it is followed by other words suggesting intention.

A

Adam’s v Kensington vestry 1884

32
Q

Word “confidence” showed intention and was accompanied by a provision for what would happen if they clause failed.

A

Comiskey v bowring handbury 1905

33
Q

Subject matter here was too ambiguous as they couldn’t define “blue chip” but could define “securities” as shares.

A

Re kolb’s will trust 1962

34
Q

“Reasonable income” hard to define, could define “reasonable” so court decided clear subject matter.

A

Re golay 1965

35
Q

“All my estate to A for life, the remainder to B” - successful case.

A

Re last 1958

36
Q

Left the residuary of her estate to her husband, and the “bulk” to her relatives which wasn’t allowed as husband couldn’t decide what “bulk” meant neither could court.

A

Palmer v simmonds 1854

37
Q

Company kept wine for “such time as they need it” but couldn’t distinguish wine from one another, so no clear certainty of subject matter.

A

Re London wine company 1986

38
Q

All shares in the trust were the same so didn’t matter which 50/100 the man took, sufficient certainty of subject matter.

A

Hunter v moss 1994

39
Q

Test for fixed trust is the listing principle

A

Re eden 1957

40
Q

Court failed listing principle for discretionary trust, introduced the is or is not test.

A

McPhail v doulton 1971

41
Q

There was difficulty interpreting the is or is not test in this case.

A

Re baden No.1

42
Q

3 judges in this case had different interpretation of is or is not test.

A

Re baden No.2 1973

43
Q

Which case says your are not allowed to use precatory worlds?

A

Lambe v eames 1871

44
Q

For his sole use and all that he has no use for to be divided equally between siblings, no sufficient SM.

A

Sprange V barnard 1789

45
Q

Testator left instructions for how the estate was to be split but this couldn’t be carried out so no sufficient certainty of beneficial interest.

A

Boyce v boyce 1849

46
Q

A gift made in contemplation of death

A

Dornatio mortis causa

47
Q

Gift made in contemplation of death has to be a perspective death not normal death.

A

King v Shilton dog rescue 2012

48
Q

Every effort rule

A

Re Rose 1952

49
Q

Case to show a Trust is conditional upon death.

A

Re v livingstone

50
Q

What is conceptual certainty?

A

No ambiguous language

51
Q

What is evidential certainty?

A

Don’t need to locate all the beneficiaries immediately but they must be ascertainable.

52
Q

Positive of subject of matter

A

Issue of wording is straightforward, cannot have precatory words or ambiguity

53
Q

Where does the negative lie in subject matter?

A

Remainder clause provisions

54
Q

Case to relate issues of remainder clauses and its “all of my estate to A for life, remainder to B”

A

Palmer v simmonds 1854

55
Q

Case to compare palmer to for subject matter essay question?

A

Re last 1958 or sprange v barnard.

56
Q

Why was re last allowed as a remainder provision.

A

Because it didn’t leave it up to B to decide what the remainder would be, testator must do this for them.

57
Q

Separate issue relating to subject matter making it unclear or complex?

A

In/tangible assets are dealt with differently to the rest. Name cases where stock cannot be segregated/defined.

58
Q

Testator didn’t imply a method of determining beneficiaries, but the court could easily imply one.

A

Re knapton 1941

59
Q

What was the initial court, court of appeal, and supreme courts decision in jones v kernott?

A

90:10, 50:50, 90:10

60
Q

Does the law on constructive trust need to be reformed?

A

YES - especially with quantifying beneficial interest no consistency. Need statutory solution.

61
Q

Transfer deed of land to 3rd party? Section?

A

S.52 (1) LPA 1925

62
Q

Deceleration must be manifested in writing

A

S.53 (1)(b) LPA 1925

63
Q

Has the law on constructive trusts improved and changed? Case?

A

YES - Abbott v Abbott 2007, the law is changing to look at the whole course of conduct.

64
Q

Is a patient allowed to make irrational decisions? Case?

A

YES - kings college NHST v C

65
Q

Which case shows even if patient objects to treatment, if it is necessary it can be carried out?

A

Mental health trust v DD 2014 - forced to have a c-section.

66
Q

What are the fraiser guidelines?

A
  1. Can they understand advice?
  2. Can’t be persuaded to inform parents?
  3. Likely to begin/continue sexual relations?
  4. Unless they receive treatment their physical and mental health will suffer?
  5. Patients best interests require it.

Cases I Need To Know For Equity (4 decks)

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