General Knowledge

Question 1

Definition of a constructive trust

Answer 1

Paragon finance v thakerer 1999

Question 2

Case that gives 2 situations where a constructive trust can arise

Answer 2

Lloyds bank v rossett 1990

Question 3

Detriment can include physical renovations

Answer 3

Eves v eves 1975

Question 4

Detriment can include bills being paid

Answer 4

Grant v Edward’s 1986

Question 5

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

Answer 5

Ungurian v lesnoff 1990

Question 6

Excuses clause example

Answer 6

Curran v Collins 2015

Question 7

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

Answer 7

Stack v dowden 2007

Question 8

Financial contribution of a gift will suffice

Answer 8

Miland bank PLC v Cooke 1995

Question 9

Direct contributions will suffice as intention to create a beneficial interest

Answer 9

Oxley v hiscock 2004

Question 10

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

Answer 10

Scientology decision 1999

Question 11

Which case applied to criteria of the Scientology decision 1999

Answer 11

Druid network 2011

Question 12

Old worn out Clarke classed as poverty in need of relief

Answer 12

Re gosling 1990

Question 13

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

Answer 13

Re gwynon 1930

Question 14

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

Answer 14

Re durpress trust 1945

Question 15

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

Answer 15

Re shaws will trust 1957

Question 16

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

Answer 16

Re basterman 1980

Question 17

4 Pemsel heads of charity case?

Answer 17

Special commission of income tax v pemsel 1891

Question 18

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

Answer 18

Re pinion 1965

Question 19

Public benefit must relate to aims of charity

Answer 19

AG v Ross 1986

Question 20

Benefits must be balanced against any detriment or harm.

Answer 20

Nation anti-vivisection v IRC 1948

Question 21

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

Numerically negligible
Personal nexus Q

Answer 21

Oppenheim v tobacco securities trust ltd 1951

Question 22

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

Answer 22

R (independent schools council) v charity commission 2012

Question 23

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

Answer 23

Target holdings v redfern 1995

Question 24

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

Answer 24

Bahin v Hughes 1886

Question 25

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

Answer 25

Re partington 1887

Question 26

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

Answer 26

Re Evan’s 1999

Question 27

Can be excluded for negligence.

Answer 27

Speight v guant 1883

Question 28

Cannot exclude for fraud.

Answer 28

Armitage v nurse 1998

Question 29

Capacity to make a trust.

Answer 29

Re beanley 1978

Question 30

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

Answer 30

Paul v Constance 1977

Question 31

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

Answer 31

Adam’s v Kensington vestry 1884

Question 32

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

Answer 32

Comiskey v bowring handbury 1905

Question 33

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

Answer 33

Re kolb’s will trust 1962

Question 34

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

Answer 34

Re golay 1965

Question 35

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

Answer 35

Re last 1958

Question 36

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.

Answer 36

Palmer v simmonds 1854

Question 37

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.

Answer 37

Re London wine company 1986

Question 38

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

Answer 38

Hunter v moss 1994

Question 39

Test for fixed trust is the listing principle

Answer 39

Re eden 1957

Question 40

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

Answer 40

McPhail v doulton 1971

Question 41

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

Answer 41

Re baden No.1

Question 42

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

Answer 42

Re baden No.2 1973

Question 43

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

Answer 43

Lambe v eames 1871

Question 44

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

Answer 44

Sprange V barnard 1789

Question 45

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.

Answer 45

Boyce v boyce 1849

Question 46

A gift made in contemplation of death

Answer 46

Dornatio mortis causa

Question 47

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

Answer 47

King v Shilton dog rescue 2012

Question 48

Every effort rule

Answer 48

Re Rose 1952

Question 49

Case to show a Trust is conditional upon death.

Answer 49

Re v livingstone

Question 50

What is conceptual certainty?

Answer 50

No ambiguous language

Question 51

What is evidential certainty?

Answer 51

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

Question 52

Positive of subject of matter

Answer 52

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

Question 53

Where does the negative lie in subject matter?

Answer 53

Remainder clause provisions

Question 54

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

Answer 54

Palmer v simmonds 1854

Question 55

Case to compare palmer to for subject matter essay question?

Answer 55

Re last 1958 or sprange v barnard.

Question 56

Why was re last allowed as a remainder provision.

Answer 56

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

Question 57

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

Answer 57

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

Question 58

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

Answer 58

Re knapton 1941

Question 59

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

Answer 59

90:10, 50:50, 90:10

Question 60

Does the law on constructive trust need to be reformed?

Answer 60

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

Question 61

Transfer deed of land to 3rd party? Section?

Answer 61

S.52 (1) LPA 1925

Question 62

Deceleration must be manifested in writing

Answer 62

S.53 (1)(b) LPA 1925

Question 63

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

Answer 63

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

Question 64

Is a patient allowed to make irrational decisions? Case?

Answer 64

YES - kings college NHST v C

Question 65

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

Answer 65

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

Question 66

What are the fraiser guidelines?

Answer 66

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.