Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Hi all,
    anyone doing equity or might have a question similar to this thought it might be useful to get some heads together and discuss our seen question in the E&T seen question this year, any contributions are appreciated;

    Eric was a rich and eccentric bachelor who died recently. He drafted his own will which contained the following dispositions:
    my Birmingham house to my sister Fiona absolutely in the hope that she will allow her daughters to live there for as long as they shall live or until they marry;
    £1,000 to each of my dear relatives;
    £10,000 for the maintenance of my horse, Dapple, for the rest of her (Dapple’s) life;
    £10,000 to my trustees to be distributed amongst such eminent literary scholars as they see fit; any dispute as to who falls within the class of beneficiaries shall be resolved conclusively by my trustees;
    The remainder of my estate to be distributed by my trustees amongst my friends, but if they prefer, my trustees may apply it for the maintenance of my tombstone.

    Advise the trustees.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    well isnt that the question Meryl Thomas wrote for BCU students?

    u talk about three certainties and beneficiary principle!!
    plus arent u leaving it really late to write up the pre-seen?

    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    First you should talk about the construction of a trust, and the certainties. There are three, object (beneficiary), subject matter, and intention. I think for the first point the object and subject are clear, but does the wording set out a trust? see Hart v Tribe and Re Adams and the Kensington Vestry.

    The second point is about the object, what is a relative? Who counts? Basically it has to be a defined group, with boundaries, 'class ascertainable'. See IRC v Broadway Cottages and McPhail v Doulton (Re Badens WT).

    You can't usually have a trust for a non human beneficiary, this is because there is no one to make sure that the trustees are doing their job properly basically. However there are exceptions to this (aren't there always?) and tombstones are one of them (Re Hooper [1932]). Another exception is for animals, the case is Pettingall v Petingall (1842) and is actually about horses. This all makes up the beneficiary principle.

    The 4th point is about a discretionary trust, where the trustee can decide if a given person (or 'postulant') is able to benefit.

    I am not quite sure about the 5th point. I guess I have some revision of my own to do!

    I hope this has helped a bit
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What's your favourite Christmas sweets?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.