Equity and Trust problem question Watch

username1690563
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#1
I have a problem question that I need some help with.

Here it goes:

Mrs Kingsley, a former student of Greenford University, made the following three bequests in her will:

(a) £90,000 to my trustees Nigel and Jill for such diligent students of the economics department of the Greenford University as my trustees shall in their absolute discretion think fit.
(b) £90,000 on trust to Nigel and Jill to be distributed as they think fit among her “relations and friends”.
(c) £70,000 to Nigel “on trust for the purposes I have communicated to him”. Mrs Kingsley handed a sealed envelope to Nigel and Jill shortly after making her will, in which the name of a Mr Mehta appeared as the person entitled to the £70,000. The money is claimed by Mr Kingsley, who is entitled to the residue of his wife’s estate.

Mrs Kingsley has just died. Advise Nigel and Jill as to the validity of each of the bequests in her will.
0
reply
TSR Learn Together
  •  Official Rep
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#2
Report 4 years ago
#2
Hi there,

While you're waiting for an answer, did you know we have 300,000 study resources that could answer your question in TSR's Learn together section?

We have everything from Teacher Marked Essays to Mindmaps and Quizzes to help you with your work. Take a look around.

If you're stuck on how to get started, try creating some resources. It's free to do and can help breakdown tough topics into manageable chunks. Get creating now.

Thanks!

Not sure what all of this is about? Head here to find out more.
reply
uni_student1
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#3
Report 1 year ago
#3
hello, did you manage to find a structure for this question? I have the same question now, and no idea on how to write it.
0
reply
username1690563
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#4
Report Thread starter 1 year ago
#4
This was 3 years ago, and I've since graduated. So I'd say yes, but E&T wasn't my favourite, and I can vaguely remember a thing.

Consider Knight v Knight for whether the trust is valid or not.

Part (b)For relations and friend see Re-baden (No.2)
Relations can be relatives- but here I think it’s slightly different because the class used here is relations, not relative.
‘As they think fit’ might imply discretionary trust.
The certainty of intention is very clear, because in each of these situations Mrs. Kingley is clear on what goes where and to whom.

Part (c) Half-secret trust. It's clear that money is given on trust and not given as an absolute gift.
Also, consider the timing of the communication.
You will find some inconsistencies in what the will says and what is being claimed.

Might not be too helpful, but this is all I got.
0
reply
uni_student1
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#5
Report 1 year ago
#5
thats amazing thank you so much!!! I managed to get something written about the half-secret trust, but the rest of the question left me puzzled.

thank you so so much for your help!!
0
reply
Bitesizelaw
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#6
Report 1 year ago
#6
a) £90,000 to my trustees Nigel and Jill for such diligent students of the economics department of the Greenford University as my trustees shall in their absolute discretion think fit.
(b) £90,000 on trust to Nigel and Jill to be distributed as they think fit among her “relations and friends”.

(a) The issue here relates to certainty of the objects as described. This is definitely a discretionary trust . 'shall' indicates that they have a duty to distribute so it's a trust not a power. The words 'in their absolute discretion think fit' confirms that the trustees have a discretion who to distribute to.

So, the key case is McPhail V Doulton and, (same case back in the Court of Appeal) Baden No 2. The description 'diligent students of the economics department of the Greenford University' will satisfy the 'any given person' test' but the problem lies with the description 'diligent'. This, it should be argued, may not sufficiently conceptually certain to satisfy the test . It may satisfy Megaw's interpretation of the McPhail test in Baden (no 2) (a substantial number) and also Sachs (if you can prove it then you are within the class) . However, this is doubtful. It would certainly fail Stamp LJ's approach.

(b) This is, without doubt, another DT. Same issue - certainty of objects . 'friends' - look at the dicta in Re Allen or Re Barlow. Court confirms 'friends' is not sufficiently certain for a DT

Amanda Grant a.k.a. Bitesizelaw (private property law tutor- Leicester). Find me on LinkedIn
Last edited by Bitesizelaw; 4 weeks ago
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

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.

Personalise

University open days

  • Cranfield University
    Cranfield Forensic MSc Programme Open Day Postgraduate
    Thu, 25 Apr '19
  • University of the Arts London
    Open day: MA Footwear and MA Fashion Artefact Postgraduate
    Thu, 25 Apr '19
  • Cardiff Metropolitan University
    Undergraduate Open Day - Llandaff Campus Undergraduate
    Sat, 27 Apr '19

Have you registered to vote?

Yes! (285)
37.75%
No - but I will (53)
7.02%
No - I don't want to (55)
7.28%
No - I can't vote (<18, not in UK, etc) (362)
47.95%

Watched Threads

View All