Trusts of the Family Home

Question 1

In a joint-name family home, what is the starting presumption of beneficial ownership?
A. Joint tenants holding equally (50/50)
B. Tenants in common in unequal shares
C. Sole beneficial ownership by the first-named titleholder
D. Resulting trust reflecting contributions

Answer 1

A. Joint tenants holding equally (50/50).
Explanation: Equity follows the legal form: joint legal ownership presumes equal beneficial shares.

Question 2

Which statutory provision governs formality for express trusts of land?
A. s 21(3) Limitation Act 1980
B. s 53(1)(b) Law of Property Act 1925
C. s 61 Trustee Act 1925
D. s 175 Companies Act 2006

Answer 2

B. s 53(1)(b) Law of Property Act 1925.
Explanation: Declarations of land trusts must be in writing and signed by the settlor.

Question 2

Which term best describes an inferred common intention from conduct?
A. Implied common intention constructive trust
B. Automatic resulting trust
C. Quistclose trust
D. Proprietary estoppel

Answer 2

A. Implied common intention constructive trust.
Explanation: Where express words are absent, courts infer intention from the course of dealings.

Question 2

Which of the following is not a direct contribution?
A. Paying the deposit toward purchase
B. Paying mortgage installments
C. Funding major structural renovations
D. Looking after children so partner can work

Answer 2

D. Looking after children so partner can work.
Explanation: That is an indirect contribution; direct contributions are financial inputs.

Question 3

What is required for an express declaration of equitable ownership?
A. Registered land title in both names
B. A will specifying residue
C. Clear contemporaneous agreement on shares
D. Mere assertion of “we’ll share it” at any time

Answer 3

C. Clear contemporaneous agreement on shares.
Explanation: Courts give effect to express statements about ownership made before or at purchase.

Question 4

Which condition must be met for proprietary estoppel?
A. Formal writing under s 2 LP(MP)A
B. Assurance by landowner
C. A statutory notice
D. Joint tenancy at law

Answer 4

B. Assurance by landowner.
Explanation: PE requires a clear assurance that the claimant will acquire rights.

Question 5

Under a sole-name CICT, what additional factor is needed to infer intention?
A. Reason why legal title is in the other name
B. The couple’s marital status
C. The property’s market value
D. A written deed of trust

Answer 5

A. Reason why legal title is in the other name.
Explanation: Courts look at reasons (e.g. financing) for sole title to infer common intention.

Question 6

Which indirect contribution may support a joint-name share adjustment?
A. Decorating and maintenance work
B. Paying the entire purchase price
C. Registering title only in one name
D. Drafting a will in favor of the partner

Answer 6

A. Decorating and maintenance work.
Explanation: In joint-name cases, non-financial contributions can inform share proportions.

Question 7

Which scenario will not give rise to a common intention constructive trust?
A. Sole title, express split declared, plus detriment
B. Joint title, no discussions, no contributions
C. Sole title, financial contributions, implied detriment
D. Joint title, unequal contributions plus agreement

Answer 7

B. Joint title, no discussions, no contributions.
Explanation: Without any intention or detriment evidence, no CICT arises.

Question 8

Which aspect is irrelevant for quantifying CICT shares?
A. Industry-standard investment returns
B. Actual contributions and agreements
C. Whole course of conduct
D. Express declarations

Answer 8

A. Industry-standard investment returns.
Explanation: Share determination focuses on intention and detriment, not external investment benchmarks.

Question 9

Anna’s name alone is on the title. She told Ben “this is ours equally” before purchase; Ben paid 40% of the price. What share?
A. 60/40 by resulting trust
B. 100% Anna; Ben a licensee
C. 40/60 by implied intention
D. 50/50 by express declaration

Answer 9

D. 50/50 by express declaration.
Explanation: Express agreement on equal shares overrides contribution proportions.

Question 10

Carl and Dina lived together; Carl paid the deposit, Dina painted interiors. Carl’s sole title. Dina sues—court will likely:
A. Infer CICT, giving Dina a share based on conduct and painting
B. Impose a purchase-money resulting trust for deposit
C. Reject claim for lack of financial contribution
D. Grant full ownership to Dina

Answer 10

C. Reject claim for lack of financial contribution.
Explanation: Painting is indirect and does not found sole-name CICT.

Question 11

Eli was promised the farmhouse in writing, moved in, renovated at cost £30k. Owner revokes. Eli’s best claim is:
A. Common intention constructive trust
B. Proprietary estoppel for assurance, reliance, detriment
C. Express trust under s 53(1)(b)
D. Automatic resulting trust

Answer 11

B. Proprietary estoppel for assurance, reliance, detriment.
Explanation: Written promise + substantial expenditure = PE remedy.

Question 12

Fay’s parents put the home in her sister’s name only for mortgage reasons. Fay paid 25% deposit. Fay’s claim:
A. Presumed resulting trust for deposit proportion
B. CICT based on inferred intention from deposit and reason
C. PE for reliance on unstated assurances
D. Quistclose trust for deposit funds

Answer 12

B. CICT based on inferred intention from deposit and reason.
Explanation: Reason for sole title and direct deposit implies common intention.

Question 13

Gus lived rent-free, cared for children, no financial payments; sole title in partner’s name. Gus’s claim:
A. Succeeds under PE for care and reliance
B. Succeeds under resulting trust for care
C. Fails for lack of direct contribution under CICT
D. Succeeds under joint tenancy presumption

Answer 13

C. Fails for lack of direct contribution under CICT.
Explanation: Sole-name CICT only recognizes financial contributions.

Question 14

Hana was told “I’ll leave you the barn” but no writing; she then paid off barn taxes for years. On owner’s death, Hana can claim:
A. Automatic resulting trust
B. Express trust
C. Resulting trust
D.Proprietary estoppel

Answer 14

D. Proprietary estoppel.
Explanation: Assurance + expenditure on reliance = PE, writing not required.

Question 15

Which principle distinguishes joint-name vs. sole-name CICTs on contributions?
A. Only financial contributions count in sole-name; both direct & indirect in joint-name
B. Both treat all contributions equally
C. Indirect contributions never count
D. Only indirect contributions count in sole-name

Answer 15

A. Only financial contributions count in sole-name; both direct & indirect in joint-name.
Explanation: Reflects differing evidential rules between contexts.

Question 16

Which form of assurance cannot support proprietary estoppel?
A. Repeated conduct treating claimant as co-owner
B. Detailed oral promise with witness
C. Vague informal suggestion by landowner
D. Written promise of lifetime occupation

Answer 16

C. Vague informal suggestion by landowner.
Explanation: PE requires clear, unequivocal assurance.

Question 17

In a joint-name CICT, X and Y buy home. X pays 70%, Y 30%. No discussions. Court will:
A. Presume 50/50 unless rebutted by express/common intention
B. Impose 70/30 by resulting trust
C. Award 70/30 under CICT from the outset
D. Deny any trust claim

Answer 17

A. Presume 50/50 unless rebutted by express/common intention.
Explanation: Joint-name presumption requires evidence to vary shares.

Question 18

Which remedy best fits a proprietary estoppel success?
A. Monetary damages only
B. Joint tenancy severance
C. Resulting trust declaration
D. Transfer of legal title or equivalent value

Answer 18

D. Transfer of legal title or equivalent value.
Explanation: Courts satisfy claimant’s expectation through title transfer or compensation.

Question 19

Which statement about implied CICT quantification is correct?
A. Courts impute shares based on overall fairness, not strict math
B. Courts require exact calculation of contributions only
C. Courts disregard indirect contributions entirely
D. Courts apply 50/50 by default

Answer 19

A. Courts impute shares based on overall fairness, not strict math.
Explanation: Imputation looks to fairness from conduct, not strict formula.

Question 20

What additional equity doctrine often overlaps CICT in family-home disputes?
A. Rule against perpetuities
B. Proprietary estoppel
C. Quistclose trusts
D. Charitable trusts

Answer 20

B. Proprietary estoppel.
Explanation: Both can arise from assurances and reliance; chosen based on facts.

Question 20

Which factor may persuade a court to allow indirect contributions in a sole-name CICT despite general rule?
A. Evidence of exceptional relationship or vulnerability
B. Market value of the home
C. Existence of a will
D. Time since purchase

Answer 20

A. Evidence of exceptional relationship or vulnerability.
Explanation: In rare cases, courts may consider broader fairness factors.

Question 21

Which limitation applies to proprietary estoppel claims?
A. No strict limitation; controlled by laches
B. Six-year statutory limit from assurance
C. Twelve-month contractual limit
D. Rule against perpetuities

Answer 21

A. No strict limitation; controlled by laches.
Explanation: PE claims are equitable; delay can deny relief but no fixed statutory bar.

Question 22

Which of the following is LEAST likely to support a CICT in a family-home case? A. Oral assurances with contemporaneous financial reliance B. Joint registration for mortgage convenience alone C. Direct deposit payments by claimant D. Written express split of shares

Answer 22

B. Joint registration for mortgage convenience alone. Explanation: Joint title for financing doesn’t prove equitable intention by itself.

Question 23

How do courts typically quantify shares in a CICT once common intention and detriment are established? A. By strictly applying the percentage of financial contributions only B. By imputing an intention based on the whole course of conduct and what is fair between the parties C. By defaulting to a 50/50 split unless a will specifies otherwise D. By using market value ratios of the property at the date of hearing

Answer 23

B. By imputing an intention based on the whole course of conduct and what is fair between the parties. Explanation: Once intention and reliance are proven, courts determine shares by asking what the parties would have intended at the time—looking at contributions, discussions, and overall fairness

Question 24

Under proprietary estoppel, what guides the choice between expectation-based relief and compensation? A. The court’s discretion to “satisfy the equity” by giving the minimum remedy to avoid unconscionability B. A statutory schedule prescribing specific remedies in order C. The claimant’s exact expectation must always be met, regardless of hardship D. The availability of alternative common law remedies

Answer 24

A. The court’s discretion to “satisfy the equity” by giving the minimum remedy to avoid unconscionability. Explanation: Courts will grant relief sufficient to avoid an unconscionable result—whether by transferring an interest or awarding compensation—aiming for the least intrusive remedy that satisfies the claimant’s equity