Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

Need desperate help on this law question. have trouble with how to answer it. watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Ok
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by electro14)
    .
    It's too late at night to offer a full answer, but hopefully this will provide a few thoughts. First, what's the question? If I were to re-write it outside the quote, it would be something like "what is sufficient to constitute (evidence of) an intention to create a trust?". I don't really like the question because there's very little debate in principle. Instead, it seems to want you to weave through the case law at a level which is very close to mere description. At least it is on a very controversial and uncertain area of law.

    You say that you know the cases, so divide them into their different propositions: (1) any which require a certain, express intention; (2) those which require something reasonably clear; (3) those where the requirements are very relaxed. As a matter of precedent, what appears to be the 'present law'? Is that sustainable in principle? If I were answering it, Milroy v Lord, Jones v Lock, Re Adams, Gissing v Gissing and Paul v Constance would always be at the forefront of my mind.

    You could also consider some special contexts where the concept of intention is be altered in some way, or applied in a special contexts, e.g. secret trusts (McCormack v Grogan, Re Snowden etc.); trust of the promise (Re Schebsman arguably limited to this scenario); the use of intention in the context of constitution in T Choithram v Pagarini, c.f. Milroy v Lord etc; use of intention in the common intention constructive trust (Jones v Kernott especially, but also Eves v Eves is an interesting case).

    Ultimately, keep your focus on the main question: what degree of clarifty of intention do you need to create a trust? These are all just ideas to develop it.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    In reply to your pm (I thought I'd post here for the benefit of anyone else reading), structure isn't something that's so set in stone that I can tell you what to do (not that you'd want anything more than advice anyway). It really depends on what content you have, and what argument you wish to make.

    With regard to what content to include in the structure and conclusion, however, I find the question slightly baffling. The only answer I can really give is 'nothing'. The introduction should be used to briefly introduce the concepts at issue and your argument, nothing more. The conclusion should just summarise and draw together your argument. There should be no content of any substance to you argument at either stage: that is the purpose of the 'main' section, as it might be called.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nolofinwë)
    In reply to your pm (I thought I'd post here for the benefit of anyone else reading), structure isn't something that's so set in stone that I can tell you what to do (not that you'd want anything more than advice anyway). It really depends on what content you have, and what argument you wish to make.

    With regard to what content to include in the structure and conclusion, however, I find the question slightly baffling. The only answer I can really give is 'nothing'. The introduction should be used to briefly introduce the concepts at issue and your argument, nothing more. The conclusion should just summarise and draw together your argument. There should be no content of any substance to you argument at either stage: that is the purpose of the 'main' section, as it might be called.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    thanks dude, but could you delete the first post that you qouted me, and post it again without quoting me. there is a massive mistake in op
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: October 26, 2015
Poll
Do you agree with the proposed ban on plastic straws and cotton buds?

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

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