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;
17 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
Wright v Atkyns
|
the words declaring a trust must be imperative-the person holding the property is obliged to hold it for the benefit of others
|
|
Re Kayford
|
A trust can be created without the word TRUST
|
|
Paul v Constance
|
This money is as much mine as it is yours was sufficient
|
|
Jones v Lock
|
an intention to make a gift will not be construed as a trust
|
|
Lambe v Evans
|
precatory words used by the donor will be dealt with strictly
|
|
Re Adams
|
The court must find upon a true construction what the meaning of the trust was
|
|
Lassence
|
where the words are ineffective, the donee will take the property absolutely
|
|
Palmer v Simmonds
|
The bulk of my estate was insufficiently certain
|
|
Re Goldcorp Exchange
|
specific property must be identified as a buyer cannot acquire title until it is known what goods the title related
|
|
Hunter v Moss
|
where goods are identical, it doesnt matter which 50 of 950 are to be donated
|
|
Sprange v Barnard
|
give the remaining part that he doesnt want in his will-construed to be a life interest with a remainder
|
|
Re Golay
|
a reasonable income was sufficient-an objective yardstick familiar to the courts
|
|
Boyce v Boyce
|
there was uncertainty after B1 died as to discretion, the gift failed
|
|
Re Knapton
|
where no method of determining distribution is provided for in his will, the courts will attempt to find one
|
|
Re Endacott
|
In order to be effective you must have ascertained or ascertainable beneficiaries
|
|
Re Eden
|
Potential beneficiaries must be ascertainable
|
|
Re Benjamin
|
Benjamin order-authorise trustees to distribute to known beneficiaries, reserving the rights of the missing beneficiaries
|