Equity&Trusts 3 Certainties

1. 1Certainty of: [blank_start]Intention[blank_end] -> [blank_start]Subject Matter[blank_end] -> [blank_start]Objects[blank_end]

   1. AIntention
   2. BSubject Matter
   3. CObjects
2. 2Certainty of Intention: is trust intended?
   Equity looks to form RATHER THAN intent -> must consider: language & conduct

   1. ATrue
   2. BFalse
3. 3[blank_start]Precatory[blank_end] (indicates gift) / [blank_start]imperative words[blank_end] (duty/command = indicates trust)

   1. APrecatory
   2. BImperative Words
   3. CImperative Words
   4. DPrecatory
4. 4Certainty of Intent: LANGUAGE
   [blank_start]Lambe[blank_end] v Eames (1870-1) LR 6 Ch App 597 – estate – widow ‘be at her disposal in any way she may think best, for benefit of herself & family’ HELD: gift NOT trust
   
   Re Diggles (1888) 39 Ch D 253 – ‘my desire’ HELD: [blank_start]NO trust[blank_end] – mere request – needs particular words to equate a trust
   
   [blank_start]Alfred[blank_end] Kinlock v The Secretary of State for India In Council (1882) 7 App Cas 619 – used term ‘in trust’ HELD: NO trust b/c word ‘trust’ [blank_start]doesn’t[blank_end] equate to trust
   
   Comiskey and Others v Bowring-Hanbury and Another [1905] AC 84 – ‘in full confidence’ HELD: TRUST created b/c whole showed [blank_start]clear intention[blank_end]
   

   1. ALambe
   2. BAlfred
   3. CAlfred
   4. DLambe
   5. ENO trust
   6. Ftrust
   7. Gdoesn’t
   8. Hdoes
   9. Iclear intention
   10. Junclear intention
5. 5Certainty of Intent: CONDUCT:
   [blank_start]Jones v Lock[blank_end] (1865-6) LR 1 Ch App 25 – father/cheque/’I give this to baby for himself’ – expressing intention HELD: [blank_start]NO trust/gift[blank_end] -> v.dangerous for precedents - use convos in imp transactions
   
   [blank_start]Paul v Constance[blank_end] [1977] 1 WLR 52 – ‘money is as much yours as mine’ repeated multiple times HELD: entitled to ½ of funds.

   1. ANO trust/gift
   2. Btrust/gift
   3. CJones v Lock
   4. DPaul v Constance
   5. EPaul v Constance
   6. FJones v Lock
6. 6Certainty of Objects: what property is held on trust & what are the beneficial interest?

   1. ATrue
   2. BFalse
7. 7Certainty of Subject Matter: LACK: = trust fails -> property returns -> settlor/estate
   
   Peck v Halsey (1726) - bequeathed '[blank_start]some[blank_end] of her best linen' HELD: void -b/c- [blank_start]uncertain[blank_end] - quality & quantity
   
   Palmer v Simmonds (1854) 'bulk' = NOT whole but greater part = [blank_start]NO trust[blank_end]
   
   Re London Wine Co [1986] [blank_start]bottles[blank_end] not IDed / separated HELD: property remains as NO certainty
   
   Hunter v Moss [1994] shares -> company HELD: NOT void -b/c- [blank_start]indistinguishable[blank_end]

   1. Asome
   2. Ball
   3. Cuncertain
   4. Dcertain
   5. ENO trust
   6. Ftrust
   7. Gbottles
   8. Hshares
   9. Iindistinguishable
   10. Jdistinguishable
8. 8Certainty of Subject Matter: BENEFICIAL INTEREST - extent:
   
   Boyce v Boyce (1849) HELD: FAILED -b/c- [blank_start]NOT clearly[blank_end] IDed
   
   Re Golay's Will Trust [1965] HELD: '[blank_start]reasonable[blank_end] income' = [blank_start]effective[blank_end] yardstick -> intention & quantity

   1. ANOT clearly
   2. Bclearly
   3. Creasonable
   4. Deffective
9. 9Certainty of Objects: who are the beneficiaries?
   
   LACK: trust fails -> property returns -> settlor/estate
   
   FIXED TRUST: Inland Revenue Commissioners v Broadway Cottages Trust [1955]
   

   1. AFixed Trust: ALL beneficiaries MUST be identifiable = LIST TEST
   2. BFixed Trust: SOME beneficiaries MUST be identifiable = LIST TEST
10. 10Certainty of Objects:
    DISCRETIONARY TRUST:
    
    [blank_start]McPhail[blank_end] & Others v [blank_start]Doulton[blank_end] & Others - Re Baden's Trust [1971] transfer shares -> benefit - company, relatives & dependants HELD: conceptual [blank_start]uncertainty[blank_end] & evidential difficulty
    
    Re Baden's Deed Trust [1973] dicretionary trust HELD: 'relatives' = evidential difficulty BUT contemptually [blank_start]certain[blank_end]
    
    Re Barlow's Will Trust [1979] for family & friends HELD: had individual opportunity -> [blank_start]gift[blank_end]
    
    R v District Auditor Ex p. West Yorkshire Met [1986] 'any OR all inhabitants' HELD: [blank_start]unworkable[blank_end] as too wide
    

    1. AMcPhail
    2. BDoulton
    3. Cuncertainty
    4. Dcertain
    5. Egift
    6. FNO gift
    7. Gunworkable
    8. Hworkable

11. 11The Effect of Lack of Certainty:
    OF [blank_start]intention[blank_end]: if NO intention - create trust then take property as gift
    
    OF [blank_start]subject matter[blank_end]: trust would fail & property returns - settlor / estate - RT
    
    OF [blank_start]objects[blank_end]: trust would fail & property returns - settlor / estate - RT

    1. Aintention
    2. Bsubject matter
    3. Cobjects
    4. Dintention
    5. Esubject matter
    6. Fobjects
    7. Gintention
    8. Hsubject matter
    9. Iobjects

Description

- law and crim y2 (Equity and Trusts) Quiz on Equity&Trusts 3 Certainties, created by Hannah Posner on 04/05/2018.

Author

Hannah Posner

Language

English

Views

0

Tags

law and crim y2equity and trusts-

Rating

No ratings yet

Rate this quiz

Rate this quiz

More on The Three Certainties