Trusts of the Family Home

These flashcards cover key concepts, cases, and principles related to Equity and Trusts as outlined in the lecture notes.

Gissing v Gissing (1971)

H left home to W, saying home was hers. No CICT. A constructive trust is created where it would be inequitable to deny a beneficial interest, and the person has been induced to act in detriment in the reasonable belief they were acquiring an interest.

Lloyds Bank v Rossett (1991)

Clarified the requirements for establishing beneficial interests in properties held in sole name.

Stack v Dowden (2007)

Joint names. Financial affairs almost entirely separate. CICT applies in ‘domestic consumer context’ to rebut principle that equity follows the law. CI is ambulatory and can be express, implied (more than just financial contributions) or imputed. Joint names cases are unlikely to lead to different result.

Jones v Kernott (2011)

Joint names. H moved out and stopped paying for 14 years. CICT applied.

Detrimental Reliance

A principle in equity where a party has incurred a detriment based on reliance on another’s promise or representations.

Implied Trust

A trust established by the conduct of the parties, not through explicit declarations or agreements.

Resulting Trust Presumptions

Legal assumptions about beneficial interests based on contributions towards purchase or holdings.

Eves v Eves 1975

Intended to marry. House conveyed to Mr name as he told Ms that it could not be conveyed to her as she was under 21. Express CICT imposed. Mr should be judged by what he led Ms to believe.

Grant v Edwards 1986

Mr told Ms the property was not conveyed to her as it may prejudice her divorce proceedings. Express CICT imposed. Common intention that Ms would have some interest, otherwise no need for excuse.

Midland Bank PLC v Cooke 1995

The court will consider the whole course of the parties dealings to determine proportions of interest once a CI has been established in the absence of express evidence

Abbott v Abbott 2007

In sole owner cases, the parties whole course of conduct must be considered in determining their intentions

Laskar v Laskar 2008

If the primary purpose of the purchase was as an investment, resulting trust applies

Wodzicki v Wodzicki 2017

Nothing close about the relationship - resulting trust applies