Unit One (case cards)

Question 1

Thomas v Times Book Co Ltd 1966

Answer 1

physical handover of assets - delivery + intention is required

Question 2

physical handover of assets - delivery + intention is required

Answer 2

Thomas v Times Book Co Ltd 1966

Question 3

Re Cole 1964

Answer 3

not enough for an effective transfer of ownership

Question 4

not enough for an effective transfer of ownership

Answer 4

Re Cole 1964

Question 5

Jaffa v Taylor Gallery Ltd 1990

Answer 5

where physical delivery is not possible. then deed to transfer ownership is okay

Question 6

where physical delivery is not possible, then deed to transfer ownership is okay

Answer 6

Jaffa v Taylor Gallery Ltd 1990

Question 7

Grey v lRC 1960

Answer 7

Natural meaning of the word ‘disposition’ Compare to Vandervell

Question 8

Natural meaning of the word ‘disposition’ compare to Vandervell

Answer 8

Grey v IRC 1960

Question 9

Re Paradise moter co LTD 1968

Answer 9

writing not needed for a disclaimer

Question 10

writing not needed for a disclaimer

Answer 10

Re Paradise moter co LTD 1968

Question 11

Vandervell 1967

Answer 11

• did not comply with S.53 (1) c LPA 1925
• Held that where we have a situation where the beneficiary recieves both legal and equitable title the trust has ended
• Courd held - did not come within scope of the act - did not matter that there was no writing - oral instruction sufficed

Question 12

• did not comply with S.53 (1) c LPA 1925
• Held that where we have a situation where the beneficiary recieves both legal and equitable title the trust has ended
• Courd held - did not come within scope of the act - did not matter that there was no writing - oral instruction sufficed

Answer 12

Vandervell 1967

Question 13

Hudson v Hathaway 2022

Answer 13

COA said email sign off is sufficient to be a signature for S.53 (1) (c)

Question 14

Paul v Constance 1977

Answer 14

Coa held declaration of trust to new GF - money went to both wife and GF

Question 15

Coa said email sign off is sufficient to be a signature for S.53 (1) (c)

Answer 15

Hudson v Hathaway 2022

Question 16

Coa held declaration of trust to new GF - money went to both wife and GF

Answer 16

Paul v Constance 1977

Question 17

Re Kayford 1975

Answer 17

No written formalities required for a declaration of trust “equity looks to substance (intent) not form”

Question 18

No written formalities required for a declaration of trust “equity looks to substance (intent) not form”

Answer 18

Re Kayford 1975

Question 19

Re Bowden 1936

Answer 19

• Changed mind 60 years later about transfering her property over
• Court held - she had no interest in that property anymore

Question 20

• Changed mind 60 years later about transferring her property over
• Court held - she had no interest in that property anymore

Answer 20

Re Bowden 1936

Question 21

Milroy v Lord 1862

Answer 21

Gave three mutually exclusive methods of transfering property inter vivos -
1. legal transfer of title too recipient
2. Transfer of title to a trustee for a beneficiary
3. A self declaration of trust
Cannot mix and match modes - only one is right

Question 22

Gave three mutually exclusive methods of transfering property inter vivos -
1. legal transfer of title too recipient
2. Transfer of title to a trustee for a beneficiary
3. A self declaration of trust
Cannot mix and match modes - only one is right

Answer 22

Milroy v Lord 1862

Question 23

Jones v Lock 1865

Answer 23

• Put check in babies hand
• Perfect gift not made - intention to make a gift but formalities not completed

Question 24

• Put check in babies hand
• Perfect gift not made - intention to make a gift but formalities not completed

Answer 24

Jones v Lock 1865

Question 25

Richard v Delbridge 1874

Answer 25

No formalities - transfer did not work

Question 26

No formalities - transfer did not work

Answer 26

Richard v Delbridge 1874

Question 27

T Choithram international S.A v Pagarani 2001

Answer 27

• Did not fit neatly into the categorisation of Lord v Milroy
• “the facts of the case are novel and raise a new point”
• Gift on trust had been created

Question 28

• Did not fit neatly into the categorisation of Lord v Milroy
• “the facts of the case are novel and raise a new point”
• Gift on trust had been created

Answer 28

T Choithram international S.A v Pagarani 2001

Question 29

Re Rose 1952

Answer 29

If settlor has made “every effort” to transfer the property, the transfer will be complete in equity

Question 30

If settlor has made “every effort” to transfer the property, the transfer will be complete in equity

Answer 30

Re Rose 1952

Question 31

Mascall v Mascall 1984

Answer 31

Every effort test passed

Question 32

Every effor test passed

Answer 32

Mascall v Mascall 1984

Question 33

Pennington v Waine 2002

Answer 33

• Every effort test not passed
• UNCONSCIONABILITY - would have been unconscionable for auntie to change mind

Question 34

• Every effort test not passed
• UNCONSCIONABILITY - would have been unconscionable for auntie to change mind

Answer 34

Pennington v Waine 2002

Question 35

Curtis v Pulbrook 2011

Answer 35

• For it to be unconscionable the recipient must have done something to her detriment relying on the fact the shares had been transfered to her

Question 36

• For it to be unconscionable the recipient must have done something to her detriment relying on the fact the shares had been transfered to her

Answer 36

Curtis v Pulbrook 2011