• Shuffle
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Alphabetize
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Front First
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Both Sides
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Read
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off

Card Range To Study



Play button


Play button




Click to flip

Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;

Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;

H to show hint;

A reads text to speech;

20 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back
Which case sets out the 2 ways in which a trust can be constituted, and what are they?
Milroy v Lord (1862)
1) the settlor declares himself the trustee of property he already owns.

2)the settlor transfers property to trustees to hold on trust (more common)
can you have a both types of constitution at the same time?
no, they are mutually exclusive.
Which case states that when a settlor declares himself trustee of his own property, the only other requirement is that it must be clear that a present irrevoable declaration of trust has been made.
Re Cozens [1913]
-there must be clear evidence of intention to create a trust. However it does not have to be in writing.
Which case suggests that a clear intention to create a trust can be inferred by conduct?
Re Vandervell's Trust [1974]
In the second type of constitution (transfer of trust property to trustees) what is required?
that the trust property 'vests' in the trustees.
Which case states that it will be sufficient that the trust property is vest in AT LEAST ONE of the intended trustees?
Choithram v Pagarini [2001]
How does property 'vest' in trustees?
if there is an effective transfer of title to the property.
Which case states that equity will not perfect an imperfect gift?
-it is not possible to construe a failed attempt to create a trust by transfer, as a declaration of trust by the settlor of property he already he already owns.
Milroy v Lord (1862)
At what point will equity consider a transfer of property as complete? and in which case? confirmed by which later case?
Re Rose [1952]
-the point at which the settlor has done everything in his power to transfer legal and beneficial ownership- MUST HAVE CROSSED THE POINT OF NO RETURN.
-confirmed in Mascall v Mascall (1984)
Which case displays and exception to the rule that equity will not assist a volunteer/ perfect an imperfect gift?
Pennington v Waine [2202]- the settlor had not actually done everything in her power to confer legal and equitable title as she had not yet delivered the transfer form.
-the court held that it was complete as it would have been unconscionable for the settlor to change her mind at this point.
What is the rule in Strong v Bird? (1874)
the step-mother's next of kin argued that Bird had to pay the outstanding £900 loan.
It was held that the debt was not owed as the testatrix had made Bird (the debtor) her executor and had thereby released the debt at law.
What are the 2 requirements to succeed under the rule in Strong v Bird?
1) there must be evidence of the settlor's intention to make an immediate inter vivos (living) gift.
2) there must be evidence hat the intention to make the gift continued throughout the entire period up until the donor's death.

EXCEPTION TO THE MAXIM THAT EQUITY WILL NOT ASSIST A VOLUNTEER (someone who has provided no valuable consideration)
What is the result of an incompletely constituted trust?
no trust exists- the settlor remains owner of the property.
What is valuable consideration?
'money or money's worth'- purely nominal consideration i.e. £1 will not suffice.
-a deed is no valuable consideration under equity.
Which case states that marriage consideration is valuable consideration?
Pullan v Koe [1913]
What is the case and what are the 3 conditions for a gift made i contemplation of death?
Cain v Moon [1896]

1)the gift must have been made in contemplation but not necessarily expectation of death;
2) the subject matter of the gift must have been delivered to the donee;
3) the gift must be made under such circumstances which show that it would revert to the donor should he/she recover.
Which case states that it does not matter if the donor dies of a different cause than the one in contemplation?
Wilkes v Allington [1931]
In which case was handing car keys over to the donee sufficient to satisfy the requirement of parting with dominion over subject matter?
Woodard v Woodard [1991]
In which case was it stated that parting with essential indicia of title (i.e. title deeds) was sufficient to part with dominion over the house?
Sen v Headley [1991]
Which case states that if the donor does not intend the gift to be CONDITIONAL on his or her death, the gift will be an ineffective inter vivos transfer?
Re Lillingstone [1952]