Source: http://www.swarb.co.uk/lisc/Trust19991999.php
Timestamp: 2013-05-20 04:51:40
Document Index: 514760295

Matched Legal Cases: ['EWCA ', 'EWCA ', 'EWCA ', 'EWCA ', 'EWCA ', 'EWCA ', 'EWCA ', 'EWCA ', 'EWCA ', 'UKPC ', 'EWCA ', 'EWCA ', 'EWCA ', 'EWCA ', 'EWCA ', 'EWCA ', 'EWCA ', 'UKPC ']

Trusts - 1999 Trusts law. This also covers law relating to trustees and trusteeship. See also Equity.
Babic -v- Thompson and Another 13 Jan 1999ChD
Interlocutory injunction granted to prevent disposal of land bought in one name but held on trust for two partners. A compromise which agreed the trust without complying with the formalities could still found a claim in trust.
Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989 2 Collier -v- Tugwell [1999] EWCA Civ 645
Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 14 Link[s] omitted National Grid Group of Electricity Supply Pension Scheme Re National Power Group of Electricity Supply Pension Scheme National Grid Plc -v- Mayes & others National Grid Plc -v- Laws & others Jefferies & others -v- Mayes & others Jefferies & others -v- [1999] EWCA Civ 762
10 Feb 1999CA
Financial Services, Employment, Trusts
Link[s] omitted Mary James -v- Edith Olga Williams [1999] EWCA Civ 921
8 Mar 1999CAThe President Sir Stephen Brown Lord Justice Swinton Thomas Lord Justice Aldous
Wills and Probate, Limitation, Trusts
A beneficiary under an intestacy, who tried to position himself as owner of assets in the estate, became a constructive trustee of those assets, with or without letters of administration, and accordingly the claim for the return of the land was not time-barred. "Parliament, wittingly or unwittingly has drawn a distinction between personal representatives and executors on the one hand who are trustees and Executors de ses torts who are not." "a constructive trust attaches by law to property which is held by a person in circumstances where it would be inequitable to allow him to assert full beneficial ownership of the property."
Limitation Act 1980 15(1) Link[s] omitted Powell -v- Snelgrove [1999] EWCA Civ 997
16 Mar 1999CA
Link[s] omitted Hughes -v- Macpherson and UCB Home Loans Corporation Limited [1999] EWCA Civ 1006
Link[s] omitted Tee -v- Tee, John Arthur Hillman Co [1999] EWCA Civ 1056; [1999] 2 FLR 61
22 Mar 1999CAThe Vice-Chancellor Lord Justice Thorpe Lord Justice Judge
The wife and her second husband occupied a property in the joint names of herself and of her first husband, who, following their divorce, had applied under the Act of 1973 for a lump sum order reflective of his equal beneficial interest in it to be made against her. Following her remarriage the wife countered with an application under TOLATA for the interest of her first husband in the property to be transferred to herself against a small payment to be made by her to him reflective of the value of what she contended to be only his minor beneficial interest in it. Following a direction that her application under TOLATA be considered at a preliminary stage, a district judge devoted eight days to the enquiry under TOLATA and A further day with the husband's application under the Act of 1973, concluding that �230,000 should be paid to the first husband in respect of his interest in the property, whether by the wife or, in default, out of the proceeds of its sale. Held: Parties to a marriage seeking a sale of jointly owned property should proceed under family law not the general civil powers. Where the parties had divorced, and one party had remarried, the procedure remained the same, particularly when, as in this case, the other party had already made and application under the Matrimonial Causes Act. The court took the opportunity to deplore the expensive protracted and bitter nature of the proceedings.
Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 24 24A - Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 14 - Married Women's Property Act 1882 18 Link[s] omitted Harding et Al -v- Joy Manufacturing Holdings Ltd 21 Apr 1999IHCS
In Scotland trustees could not delegate to the court discretion vested in them, but at the most could seek the court's guidance and direction before exercising that discretion themselves.
Sandra Simmons -v- Rajah Mackie Simmons [1999] EWCA Civ 1263
26 Apr 1999CA
Link[s] omitted Wight, Wight -v- Olswang, Peters [1999] EWCA Civ 1309
29 Apr 1999CA
Where a trustee sought to rely upon an exemption clause, to relieve him against a claim for a breach of trust, the exemption clause would be of no avail where the trustee was to be paid for his services. The terms of these clauses were contradictory.
[ Bailii ] Houghton and others -v- Fayers and Day [1999] EWCA Civ 1359
7 May 1999CA
Limitation Act 1980 14A 32 Rowe -v- Prance 26 May 1999ChD
A boat had been bought and held in one persons name, but on reassurance that it would be 'ours.' The share was substantial but unquantified, and so equality was assumed. An express trust of personalty need not be formal. Constructive trust rules were unhelpful.
The Trustee of the Property of Jan Yngve Pehrsson, a bankrupt -v- Madeleine von Greyerz [1999] UKPC 26;
16 Jun 1999PC
Commonwealth, Company, Equity, Trusts
PC (Gibraltar) The mere appointment of trustees of shares without the delivery to the trustees of forms of transfer did not give rise to a trust. Held: A gift was intended to take effect by a transfer of the shares and it is therefore impossible to construe it as having taken place by a change in the beneficial interest before the transfer had been registered. It is true that in accordance with the decision in In re Rose a gift of shares will be regarded as completed even before registration when the donor has clothed the beneficiary with the power to obtain registration. Thus when the donor has executed a transfer and delivered it to the beneficiary or his agent, equity regards the gift as completed. No further act on the part of the donor is needed to vest the legal title in the beneficiary and the donor has no power to prevent it. But this principle could not apply to the present case until the nominee shareholders had executed and delivered transfers into her possession or constituted themselves agents for her. Until that time, they remained nominees for the donor and it was open to him to countermand the gift. Since the transfers were not executed until the same day as registration took place, the principle in In re Rose is of no assistance to her.
Link[s] omitted Yaxley -v- Gotts and Another [1999] EWCA Civ 1680; [1999] 1 WLR 1217; [2000] Ch 162; [1999] EGCS 92; [1999] EWCA Civ 3006; [2000] 1 All ER 711
24 Jun 1999CARobert Walker LJ, Beldam LJ, Clarke LJ
Land, Trusts, Estoppel
The defendant offered to give to the Plaintiff, a builder, the ground floor of a property in return for converting the house, and then managing it. They were friends, and the oral offer was accepted. The property was then actually bought in the name of the first defendant, the second defendant's son. The Plaintiff nevertheless fulfilled his promise. The parties fell out, and the first Defendant then refused to grant to the Plaintiff any interest in the property. The judge found that the oral agreement with the second Defendant had been adopted by his son. The Plaintiff was entitled to an interest by a proprietory estoppel, and he ordered the first Defendant to grant him a 99 year lease of the ground floor. Held: The defendant's appeal failed. The oral agreement was enforceable having created a trust, even though no paper had been signed to evidence the contract as required by law. A constructive trust might be created where previously part performance or proprietory estoppel might have created one. The doctrine of part performance has not survived the 1989 Act, but the doctrine of estoppel may still operate to modify (and sometimes perhaps even counteract) the effect of section 2 of the 1989 Act. The 1989 Act represents "a radical change in the law". "In the area of a joint enterprise for the acquisition of land (which may be, but is not necessarily, the matrimonial home) the two concepts [estoppel and constructive trust] coincide"; and "the species of constructive trust based on 'common intention' is closely akin to, if not indistinguishable from, proprietary estoppel".
Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989 2 Link[s] omitted Houghton and 39 Others -v- Fayers and Day [1999] EWCA Civ 1761
5 Jul 1999CA
Link[s] omitted A E Reynolds Plc -v- Raymond Pratt; Carol Pratt and Leonard John Arboine [1999] EWCA Civ 1785
Land, Insolvency, Trusts
[ Bailii ] Burton & An -v- Fx Music Ltd & Another; Taube -v- Fx Music Ltd [1999] EMLR 826
8 Jul 1999ChD
Trusts, Equity
To decide that a party had made itself a trustee of a promise, the court had first to look at whether the person making the promise had indicated he had intended such. Once clear instructions had been evidenced, and payments made, the court would be reluctant to find that no trust had been created. Letters requesting payment of royalties had been acted upon.
Sumir Singh Dhingra -v- Surjit Singh Dhingra [1999] EWCA Civ 1899
Link[s] omitted Abrahams -v- Trustee In Bankruptcy of Abrahams 26 Jul 1999ChD
A member of a lottery syndicate having paid into it, acquired the right that any winnings should be held in trust upon the terms of the syndicate's lottery agreement which then applied. It was possible that such a right could be held as a property right upon a resulting trust. A couple, members of a syndicate, separated, but the wife paid in both names. She was entitled since she was the originator of both fees.
Jyske Bank (Gibraltar) Limited -v- Spjeldnaes; Metcalf; Zoltan-Frank; Jacobsen; Gould; Bullen; Juillet Limited; Recolte Investments Limited; Fondconsult Ltd etc [1999] EWCA Civ 2018
29 Jul 1999CALord Justice Nourse Lord Justice Sedley And Mr Justice Colman
Trusts, Banking
Link[s] omitted Akobuike Udeozo -v- Gertrude Odogwu [1999] EWCA Civ 2033
Link[s] omitted The Equitable Life Assurance Society -v- Hyman [1999] EWHC 847 (Ch)
9 Sep 1999ChD
Where a mutual life assurance company had allowed some members to acquire reasonable expectations that they would receive certain benefits under their policies, such expectations fell short of a contractual right, and where necessary, the trustees and directors retained the discretion under the articles of the company to reduce bonuses in line with investment returns.
[ Bailii ] X -v- A and Others 13 Oct 1999ChD
Environmental Protection Act 1990 Part II Fuller -v- Evans and Others 27 Oct 1999ChD
A settlor created a trust in favour of his wife and children with provision preventing them from making any disposition which would benefit him. The parties were divorced and he was ordered to pay maintenance to the children. The Trustees were concerned that in making payments to the children they would be reducing his liability. It was held that they must take that into account, but that it need not stop a proper decision to fulfil the duties under the trust.
Helga Stoeckert -v- Margie Geddes (Appeal No 66 of 1998) [1999] UKPC 52
13 Dec 1999PCLord Browne-Wilkinson, Lord Steyn, Lord Hoffmann, Lord Saville of Newdigate, Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough
Commonwealth, Trusts, Family, Wills and Probate
PC Jamaica The claimant claimed against the estate of her former partner. Though not married they had lived together for many years, and she claimed there had been an express understanding that she would receive part of his estate. A constructive trust was claimed and denied. Held: The facts alleged were not capable of sustaining the claim. Leaving the claimant in charge of his business whilst the deceased had gone to live abroad did not establish such a trust, and nor did the several statements made.