Hey there Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

trusts - homes/resulting trusts/advancement

Announcements Posted on
Study Help needs new mods! 14-04-2014
Post on TSR and win a prize! Find out more... 10-04-2014
    • Thread Starter
    • 0 followers
    Online

    ReputationRep:
    this should be ridiculously straightforward but i can't wrap my head around it -

    a father purchases property in his daughter's sole name, contributing half the purchase price in cash, and the other half by a mortgage that he makes the daughter responsible for.

    - the situation is within the realm of advancement (father-child)
    - advancement can be rebutted (Lavelle v Lavelle) where there is evidence that the intention was not to make a gift
    - if advancement is rebutted then it's a PRT

    my instinct was that you could rebut the presumption of advancement pretty easily by saying that the daughter was responsible for the mortgage, which would suggest against an outright gift of the property - but now i'm not sure. any help?!

    edit: now thinking that you can't rebut the presumption - Lavelle v Lavelle the evidence used to rebut was tax avoidance - no such indication here so it should be a straightforward application of presumption of advancement?
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pippaaa)
    this should be ridiculously straightforward but i can't wrap my head around it -

    a father purchases property in his daughter's sole name, contributing half the purchase price in cash, and the other half by a mortgage that he makes the daughter responsible for.

    - the situation is within the realm of advancement (father-child)
    - advancement can be rebutted (Lavelle v Lavelle) where there is evidence that the intention was not to make a gift
    - if advancement is rebutted then it's a PRT

    my instinct was that you could rebut the presumption of advancement pretty easily by saying that the daughter was responsible for the mortgage, which would suggest against an outright gift of the property - but now i'm not sure. any help?!

    edit: now thinking that you can't rebut the presumption - Lavelle v Lavelle the evidence used to rebut was tax avoidance - no such indication here so it should be a straightforward application of presumption of advancement?
    I think presumption of resulting trust is something like a question of fact, even in very similar situations court may feel that in one case there was an intention to make a gift yet in another it may find there wasn't an intention to make a gift. The critical question for the court to find the answer to is what in fact the father intended and any evidence/facts can be used to answer the question. The best thing to do on exam in such cases is to analyse both possibilities i.e. these are the facts indicating the father intended to make a gift, those are the facts indicating there wasn't any intention to make a gift, if the court decides there was intention of making a gift then... [continue assuming the father made a gift]... and if the court holds there was no intention to make a gift, then...[continue as if there is resulting trust].

    By the way, the presumption of advacement is now abolished by the Equality Act 2010, so on the exam make sure you know when the trust was created, if it was created after the Act came into effect then there is no presumption of advancement. (And if the question is silent on this, analyse both possibilities).
    • 4 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by vahik92)
    By the way, the presumption of advacement is now abolished by the Equality Act 2010, so on the exam make sure you know when the trust was created, if it was created after the Act came into effect then there is no presumption of advancement. (And if the question is silent on this, analyse both possibilities).
    s199 Equality Act 2010 isn't yet in force.

Reply

Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?

    this is what you'll be called on TSR

  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?

    never shared and never spammed

  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. By completing the slider below you agree to The Student Room's terms & conditions and site rules

  2. Slide the button to the right to create your account

    Slide to join now Processing…

    You don't slide that way? No problem.

Updated: May 13, 2012
Article updates
Reputation gems:
You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.