Resulting trust meaning

Existence and validity of trusts Provincial Equity Finance Ltd v Dines (née Breda) [2023] EWHC 103 (Ch) News Analysis: A literary epigraph—‘By prosperous voyages I often made… and the great care of goods at random left’—introduces a consideration of resulting trusts and the scope of express trusts. The decision underscores the practical obstacles in proving a resulting trust where a disorganised deceased ran bank accounts for mixed ends, and confirms that an express trust can override the presumption of a resulting trust even if the contributor of funds is not a party to the express trust. Author: Nicholas Holland, McDermott Will & Emery UK LLP Jurisdiction: England & Wales Attorney General v Zedra Fiduciary Services (UK) Ltd and others [2022] EWHC 102 (Ch) News Analysis: The court sanctioned a cy près scheme for a £600m charitable trust to be used towards reducing the National Debt, addressing the suitable application of the National Fund. The judgment considers...

Rowland v Blades [2021] EWHC 426 (Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? Common intention vs resulting trust The judge concluded the property was not a business venture, albeit there was an investment aspect. It was therefore handled in line with dwelling house/family home authorities. The starting presumption from Stack v Dowden [2007] UKHL 17, [2007] 2 All ER 929—affirmed in Jones v Kernott [2011] UKSC 53, [2012] 1 All ER 1265—that equity tracks the legal title so the parties are beneficial joint tenants in equal proportions, applied. The Privy Council decision in Marr v Collie [2017] UKPC 17 did not dislodge this, as the acquisition arose in a domestic rather than commercial setting. Evidence This ruling underscores the evidential weight of contemporaneous documents, particularly where witness accounts directly conflict. Compensation under the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 (TOLATA 1996) vs occupation rent in equity Here, compensation under TOLATA 1996 is the appropriate remedy. Traditional equitable occupation...

In this issue: Court of Protection UK taxes for Private Client HMRC Manuals updates Budgets and Finance Bills Insolvency—Private Client Contentious trusts and estates Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland International Question of the week Additional Private Client updates this week Daily and weekly news alerts LexTalk®Private Client: a Lexis®PSL community New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Latest Q&As Useful information Court of Protection Court of Protection approves indefinite extension of injunction against P’s son in order to protect and support best interest decisions made for P (MK (‘P’), In the Matter of) This matter relates to MK, an 81-year-old woman with vascular dementia. To safeguard court-ordered best interests decisions concerning MK’s living arrangements and care, the court continued, on an open-ended basis, an injunction limiting her son’s contact and preventing him from independently arranging medical assessments. The court determined it holds jurisdiction, under...

PI & Clinical Negligence weekly highlights—11 January 2024 In this issue: Supreme Court decision in Paul and another v Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust Road traffic accidents Employers’ liability Occupiers’ liability Abuse and criminal injuries Fraud and fundamental dishonesty Regulation of healthcare professionals Brexit Useful information Daily and weekly news alerts Supreme Court decision in Paul and another v Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust The Supreme Court has delivered its Judgment in Paul v Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust [2024] UKSC 1, addressing whether a person may recover for psychiatric harm after observing the death or another shocking event involving a close relative resulting from earlier clinical negligence. By a six-to-one majority, the court determined that, whilst doctors owe a duty of care to protect their patients’ health, they do not owe a duty to close family members to guard them from illness arising from witnessing a relative’s death or medical crisis caused by a condition...

Under the Limitation Act 1980 (LA 1980), the expiry of a limitation period does not extinguish the underlying right; it simply blocks the claimant’s remedy. Limitation must be raised by the defendant, and when properly pleaded it operates as a complete defence. Once pleaded, the initial burden lies with the claimant to demonstrate they fall within time; if they do, the burden then shifts to the defendant to show otherwise. Sections 21, 22 and 23 of LA 1980 reaffirm the earlier position set out in sections 19 and 20 of the Limitation Act 1939, and they extend to executors and trustees, including trustees of express, resulting and constructive trusts of property. LA 1980 also preserves the distinction between: trustees who have acted fraudulently or retained trust assets or converted them to their own use, and trustees responsible for an innocent or negligent breach of trust The purpose of limitation Limitation prescribes the timeframe in which a claimant may pursue a remedy. Its...

The section 2 requirements in the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989 (LP(MP)A 1989) are disapplied for certain contracts and trusts. This Practice Note identifies those categories and outlines how the exceptions take effect. Excepted contracts The contractual formalities set out in LP(MP)A 1989, s 2 do not apply to contracts: for leases not exceeding three years (ie short leases under Law of Property Act 1925, s 54) made in the course of a public auction regulated under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (other than a regulated mortgage contract, regulated home reversion plan, regulated purchase plan or a regulated sale and rent back agreement) Constructive trusts The statutory formalities in LP(MP)A 1989, s 2 do not affect the creation or operation of resulting, implied or constructive trusts. No written evidence is required. A constructive trust arises in relation to legal title where a party’s conduct makes it unconscionable to allow them to deny the other party...

Resulting trusts represent one of the three species of trust that do not need to be declared or evidenced in writing at all. The others are constructive and implied trusts, though it is arguably doubtful whether any implied trust exists that is not in reality either a resulting trust or a constructive trust (‘implied’ in this setting often being used simply as a synonym for ‘resulting’ or ‘constructive’). Categorisation of resulting trusts Resulting trusts are either presumed or automatic. A presumed resulting trust arises where: there is a voluntary transfer of property by one person to another; or title to property is placed in the name of someone other than the person who provided the purchase money or other consideration for the acquisition An automatic resulting trust arises where the disposing party has failed to dispose of the entirety of their legal and beneficial interest in the property that is the subject of the disposition. Presumed resulting trusts Voluntary...