Equity and Trusts HELP!
I have an extended problem question as my exam for equity and trusts however, one issue is proving to be a problem.
In the question, the settlor is creating a will in which 15,000 shares are to be held on trust for Mavis for life; Gordon and James absolutely.
Mavis is the settlor's wife and Gordon and James are two of their four children. I'm not sure if its the wording, or a trick question or a question worded to look like a trick but we are asked to advise about the validity of the provisions and I just can't wrap my head around it... is there anything wrong with this provision??
In the question, the settlor is creating a will in which 15,000 shares are to be held on trust for Mavis for life; Gordon and James absolutely.
Mavis is the settlor's wife and Gordon and James are two of their four children. I'm not sure if its the wording, or a trick question or a question worded to look like a trick but we are asked to advise about the validity of the provisions and I just can't wrap my head around it... is there anything wrong with this provision??
Work your way through the 3 certainties to ascertain if anything is wrong with the trust.
Intention - is the wording imperative or precatory?
Subject matter - interest or property?
Object - fixed trust or discretionary, if discretionary, are they any conceptual or evidential problems?
Intention - is the wording imperative or precatory?
Subject matter - interest or property?
Object - fixed trust or discretionary, if discretionary, are they any conceptual or evidential problems?
Original post by james_law
Work your way through the 3 certainties to ascertain if anything is wrong with the trust.
Intention - is the wording imperative or precatory?
Subject matter - interest or property?
Object - fixed trust or discretionary, if discretionary, are they any conceptual or evidential problems?
Intention - is the wording imperative or precatory?
Subject matter - interest or property?
Object - fixed trust or discretionary, if discretionary, are they any conceptual or evidential problems?
It does meet all the requirements to be valid, I just don't really understand the word "absolutely". Does that mean, once Mavis inherits the shares she is subject to Gordon and James' authority over what she intends to do with them? I've never really heard my lecturer use the phrase in any problem questions we've had so don't really understand it other then Gordon and James being the absolute beneficiaries?
Original post by username3689312
Work your way through the 3 certainties to ascertain if anything is wrong with the trust.
Intention - is the wording imperative or precatory?
Subject matter - interest or property?
Object - fixed trust or discretionary, if discretionary, are they any conceptual or evidential problems?
Intention - is the wording imperative or precatory?
Subject matter - interest or property?
Object - fixed trust or discretionary, if discretionary, are they any conceptual or evidential problems?
My advice would be to ignore this advice. Precatory words?! Fixed or DT when the objects are named!! Totally irrelevant
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- 1st Class Law Essays
- What is the most boring law module?
- 3rd year law help
- Uni Law Study
- law problem question
- Is commercial law more similar to contract or trusts?
- Getting a loan for postgrad
- Predicting Degree Classification
- Tips for getting a 1st in Law timed exams
- Law Problem Question
- Dual degree
- uni
- Whats the difference between social exchange theory and equity theory AQA Psychology?
- Equity trusts advice
- How to get a first in Law problem questions
- LPC Exams ULaw
- Equity and Trusts Help
- equity and trusts
- Law conversion / GDL
- Need some guidance - Liverpool
Latest
Trending
Last reply 1 week ago
OCR A-level Law Paper 3 (H418/03) - 12th June 2023 [Exam Chat]Trending
Last reply 1 week ago
OCR A-level Law Paper 3 (H418/03) - 12th June 2023 [Exam Chat]
