Resulting Trusts Flashcards
(11 cards)
What does s.53(2) Law of Property Act 1925 say about formalities for resulting trusts?
It states that resulting trusts are exempt from formality requirements. Even without a written trust, equity can impose a trust based on intentions or contributions, including oral or implied arrangements.
What is the purpose of s.60(3) Law of Property Act 1925, and why is it controversial?
It was intended to remove the automatic presumption of a resulting trust in voluntary transfers of land, where no trust is stated. However, it is unclear and controversial in interpretation.
What happened in Hodgson v Marks?
Mrs Hodgson transferred her home to a friend, intending him to hold it on her behalf. He sold it to Marks, a bona fide purchaser.
Why was a resulting trust imposed in Hodgson v Marks?
A type B (automatic) resulting trust arose:
- Mrs Hodgson retained a beneficial interest.
- Mr Evans held no beneficial interest to transfer.
- She was in actual occupation, creating an overriding interest.
What does Equality Act 2010, s.199 propose (not yet in force)?
It aims to abolish the presumption of advancement, which currently applies:
From husband to wife, and
Parent to child.
If rebutted, the court applies a presumed resulting trust; otherwise, it remains a gift.
What did Westdeutsche establish about resulting trusts?
A resulting trust arises only if the recipient’s conscience is affected — they must know or ought to know they are not entitled.
How did Lord Browne-Wilkinson categorise resulting trusts in Westdeutsche?
Type A (Presumed RT): Arise from no intention to gift. No gift intended. No consideration. No express trust created.
Type B (Automatic RT): Arise where formalities for an express trust are not met (e.g., no signed writing under s.53(1)(b)). Arise from failure to execute valid express trust.
What new approach to illegality did Patel v Mirza [2016] establish?
Overturned the Tinsley v Milligan rule and set a flexible test for recovering under an illegal agreement:
1) Purpose of the prohibition.
2) Relevant public policies.
3) Whether denying relief would be disproportionate.
What principle was established in Dyer v Dyer (1788) about presumed resulting trusts?
Where:
1) A person pays for property,
2) But it’s registered in someone else’s name,
3) And there’s no intention to gift,
→ A presumed resulting trust arises for the person who paid.
What did the court decide in Re Vandervell’s Trusts (No 2) about formalities?
The creation of an express trust to replace a resulting trust is not a disposition under s.53(1)(c) and therefore does not require writing.
What was held in Lohia v Lohia [2001] about voluntary conveyances and s.60(3)?
The court ruled that s.60(3) does not abolish the presumption of resulting trusts in voluntary conveyances.
