S1 Cases

Question 1

Chambers v Fahy 1931

Answer 1

3 certaintees, the property wasn’t taken beneficially. It was taken on trust.

Question 2

Re Humphrey’s Estate 1916

Answer 2

If a trust is intended, language needs to be certain. Precatory Words are not enough. “I wish”, “I desire”

Question 3

Re Bayley 1945

Answer 3

Wasn’t void of uncertainty. “Irish relatives”. The testator doesn’t have to name every single beneficiary

Question 4

Re Blake 1995

Answer 4

Interferring w/ Parental Duties
Raise as Roman Catholic religion.
Gift = void

Question 5

Re Trust of the Abbott Fund 1900

Answer 5

Resulting trust for the subscribers
What was their intent?

Question 6

Re Andrew’s Trust 1905

Answer 6

the subscribers’ had parted with the money
the intention was to benefit the children

Question 7

Re Foord 1922

Answer 7

sister died, left over money went to the sister’s estate.
it was a gift.
intention of gift and words of endearment- she was a beneficiary
wording of the will was looked at

Question 8

Re Slattery 1917

Answer 8

life insurance policy on someone else
money belonged to the one who paid it and had physical control over the policy

Question 9

Owens v Greene 1932

Answer 9

Joint Deposit Cases
falied to rebut the presumption of a resulting trust
uncle set up account w/nephew who’s name is on the account
when the uncle died, money held on resulting trust for his estate.

Question 10

Lynch v Burke 1990

Answer 10

Rebuts the presumption of resulting trust
Overruled Owens v Greene
has the same facts accept niece was present and when account was opened and signed for it
niece got the money

Question 11

Re Grimes 1937

Answer 11

Presumption of Advancement
son’s wife was entitled to the securities by presumption of advancement

Question 12

Re McEnery: O’Connell v AG 1941

Answer 12

Family cannot benefit from a charitable trust
the trust didn’t benefit the community or the public

Question 13

Oppenheim v Tobacco Securities Trust Co. Ltd 1951

Answer 13

trust created for the benefit of the children of employees and former employees
not for the public benefit
if there’s a connection between the executors & the beneficiaries, there can’t be a public benefit

Question 14

Dingle v Turner 1972

Answer 14

the relief of poverty
“poor employees”
was charitable

Question 15

O’Brien v Sheil 1873

Answer 15

Presumption of Advancement
- Where a father purchases property in the name of his child or transfers it into the child’s name, the presumption of advancement will apply.

Question 16

Re Worth Library 1995

Answer 16

Cy-près Doctrine
- book collection donated for the benefit the hospital
- the original prupose had ended so they should continue with a similar purpose
Certainty of Objects
- the requirement for living identifiable persons as beneficiaries is loosened.

Question 17

Arnott v Arnott 1924

Answer 17

Trustees who are difficult to deal with are subject to removal
- trustee refused to agree with anything

Question 18

Moore v McGlynn 1894

Answer 18

Conflict of Interest of the Trustee
- the shop that the trustee was supposed to run, was very similar to his own shop
- removed him as a trustee

Question 19

Spencer v Kinsella 1996

Answer 19

The Welfare of the beneficiary can cause the removal of trustees

Question 20

Bartlett v Barclays Bank Trust Co. Ltd 1980

Answer 20

-where a series of transactions of a breaching trustee are related, one transation could effect another

Question 21

Cowan v Scargill 1985

Answer 21

The duty of the trustee is to maximise the interests of the beneficiary

Question 22

Chaine-Nickson v Bank of Ireland 1976

Answer 22

Beneficiary’s right to information in a discretionary trust
- trustee could be violating the duty of loyalty

Question 23

Target Holdings Ltd v Redferns 1996

Answer 23

DEFAULT RULE: equal shares of liability
- the beneficiaries can sue just one trustee or more
- the default rule will be put aside to make the trust whole
- THE TRUST WILL NOT FAIL ON ACCOUNT OF A TRUSTEE

Question 24

Bahin v Hughes 1886

Answer 24

If a trustee is in knowlegdge of a breach and keeps silent, they are equally liable

Question 25

French v Graham 1860

Answer 25

The beneficiary can share in the liabilty but only to the limit of their interest in the trust
- Digby French, Edward French and Graham

Question 26

AIB Group (UK) Plc v Mark Redler & Co. 2014

Answer 26

3rd party liability of solicitors for negligence

Question 27

Gabbett v Lawder 1883

Answer 27

“no person in a fiduciary capacity shall be allowed to retain any advantage gained by him in his character as a trustee”

Question 28

Attorney-General for Hong Kong v Reid 1994

Answer 28

bribes are automatically held on constructive trust for the beneficairy the moment the bribe was accepted.

Question 29

Sherrard v Barron 1923

Answer 29

A constructive trust will be enforced if an agent takes advantage of services provided to his principal without the principal’s knowledge and makes a profit for himself.

Agents are required to fully disclose to their principals any and all transactions in which they are profiting off of their principals, whether directly or indirectly.

Question 30

Royal Brunei Airlines Sdn Bhd v Tan Kok Ming 1995

Answer 30

Dishonest Assistance of a 3rd Party
- just focus on if the third party did something wrong
- You don’t have to establish liability of the primary party/trustee
- constructive trust will be put on the 3rd party

Question 31

Murray v Murray 1996

Answer 31

• the sister’s nephew and girlfriend living the man’s house and not letting him in.
• he paid 25% of the mortgage and she paid 75% of it
• she was making the monthly payments so the house was mostly hers
• it was a failed gift cause she died.

Question 32

H.K.N. Invest Oy v Incotrade Pvt Ltd 1993

Answer 32

Constructive trust imposed on employees of Incotrade to return the money back to Incotrade so they can return it to HKN

Question 33

Keech v Sandford 1726

Answer 33

Profits and property acquired by trustee in breach of fiduciary duty is held on constructive trust for the beneficiary.

Question 34

Parkes v Parkes 1980

Answer 34

The husband argued that he should have the property because he paid for it.
The court said that they can’t give him relief because he tried to avoid taxes
So the wife gets to keep the property.
The court wanted to stay clean

-Needs to be a connection between impropriety and relief sought for maxim to apply

Question 35

Feeney v MacManus 1937

Answer 35

Even distribution of remaining funds on an equal basis

Question 36

Re Diplock 1948

Answer 36

Equity will not suffer a wrong (contrary to the law) to be without a remedy
- equity will intervene to protect a right that for some reason is not enforceable at common law
- there must be pre-existing equitable remedy

Question 37

Tinsley v Milligan 1994

Answer 37

Illegality Defence
- can’t rely on illegal act to establish claim

Question 38

Patel v Mirza 2016

Answer 38

OVERRULLED Tinsley v Milligan
- range of factors to determine whether they can rely or not.
- more fair and clear

Question 39

Re Parker 1966

Answer 39

“necessitous nephews and nieces”
- a class of beneficiaries

Question 40

Re Doyle 1972

Answer 40

• In fact the daughter said that she did not become aware of the condition until after her father’s death.
• Kenny J, answering questions raised by the executor on a construction summons, held that this condition was void as being impossible to perform.
• He also held, however, that the condition was void as being contrary to Article 44.2.1° of the Constitution