Revision Equity & Trust 28 January 2022 PDF

Preview

Summary

REVISION 28 JANUARY 2022o SRA-Section 20 (Specific Performance not enforceable) & Study injunction. S&55 + illustration. o Contract of .... in SRA o Equity introduced by lord chancellor to bind the conscience of parties!!! o Always ask what is the fair/conscienable thing to do?Constitution o...

Description

REVISION 28 JANUARY 2022 o SRA-Section 20 (Specific Performance not enforceable) & Study injunction. S.54&55 + illustration. o Contract of …. in SRA o Equity introduced by lord chancellor to bind the conscience of parties!!! o Always ask what is the fair/conscienable thing to do? Constitution of Trust Equity will not perfect an imperfect gift – Must fulfil formalities Exceptions to this 1. Prove all formalities have been executed OR; 2. Donatio Mortis Causa (Imperfect Gift) -Gift by reason of death or expectation of death equity will act on its conscience to perfect / try to assist even if formalities not execute -must fulfil 3 elements/requirements -Few cases added in slides on this topic -Handover of the deeds amount to parting dominion -Sen v Headley (Will Property & Immovable Property) > Died without leaving a Will 3. Strong v Bird -Involving debt (Gift given to relinquish debt to debtor (executor receives gift)) -Executor oversee the Will left behind to ensure it is being properly managed by trustee -Debt of son to stepmother 9000 pound -Imperfect gift -Intention of stepmom to relinquish debt of the son -Executor duty is to acquire testator’s rights to collect debt of the stepmom, in this case it is impossible for the son to sue himself. -By appointing the son as executor in the Will, son is considered to be relinquished of the debt. -Re Gonin (attempt to apply rule in Strong v Bird) -Ct found no continuing intention to give house and garden to the daughter (administratix) bcs mother had previously sold part of the garden to a third party. -Equittable & Beneficial Title will get to enjoyed although Legal Title has not passed ie;- ( Re Rose, Sean v Headley)

 Problem Question Sean was diagnosed with lung cancer (expecting/impending death). He had recently died, leaving behind a will (DMC not relevant bcs there is a Will-formalities completed) in which he had bequeathed everything to his partner, Penny. Four months before he died, he had given a loan of RM800,000 to his gardener, Penn. Sean had named Penn as the executor to his will. Throughout six months leading to his death, Sean was taken care by Lanney. Sean had promised Lanney the house that he was staying in. The house actually belonged to his father. Advise all parties on their respective entitlement to Sean's estate. (10 marks) -Penny has rights to all of Sean’s property as mentioned in the Will. -Penn on loan of RM800,000 (Executor for everything of Sean’s property) -Penny not entitled to claim Penn’s debt as Penn was appointed as the executor -Penn as executor to Sean’s Will can’t sue himself to pay the debt -Strong v Bird applies > Penn’s debt is relinquished -Lanney not entitled to the house because Sean was expecting to receive the house from his father (future property). Therefore, trust can’t be created because Sean is not the owner of the house. Title can’t be transferred to Lanney. -Sean had rightly & formally let go of the Will to Penny. -Maxim is not exhaustive. However, this situation can be applied to “When equities are equal, the first in time will prevail” & “equity will look to substance rather than form” -Thus, Penn beneficial & equittable rights will prevail. By applying Re Gonin;As the Will takes effect upon death, Sean’s prior act in appointing Penn as executor indicates no continuation of intention to give everything to Penny -Rebut > Penn was just appointed as the executor. However, Penny was stated to be entitled to the properties of Sean. Thus, this indicate that when the Will takes effect, Penn is to execute on how Penny manages the property. Since, Penn had a duty to collect debts owed to Sean, if Penny wants to claim for the debt as he claims to be entitled to everything, it cannot be imposed upon Penn as it is impossible for Penn to sue himself.

TUTORIAL 4 FEBRUARY 2022 Resulting Trust – Problem Based Question -money divided according to the proportion of the contribution -Private Purpose Trust (not a valid trust) -Max 4 TRUSTEES vs Secret Trust -Rule Against ‘Perpetuity’ > Trust to preserve something limited to 21 years. > Can only change on court’s order on sentimental values? > Purpose Trust is limited for a certain period, cannot be in perpetuity. -If create trust in China and it allows for more than 21 years > China law will apply, allows perpetuity > Must state the number of the years. -Malaysia > No beneficiary can benefit in perpetuity > Money goes back to the economic flow. -Charitable Trust > No maximum number of trustees as in Section 4 Trustee Act -...