a thesis - Institute of Advanced Legal Studies

80 EXPRESS TRUSTS.
The effect of the decision of the Court of Appeal in this case
seems to be that there must be sufficient evidence to warrant a
judge or jury in finding that the settlement was intended to delay,
hinder, or defraud creditors. In the absence of any evidence at all,
such an intent may be inferred from the fact that the necessary result
of the settlement teas to defeat or delay the creditors. This inference
is, however, one of fact only and not of law, and may be rebutted
if the evidence as a whole shows that no such intention existed.
(See Hunt, Fraudulent Conveyances, 2nd ed. 54, 55.)
Illustrations.
1. A., who is solvent at the time, but has contracted a considerable
debt, which will fall due in the course of a few weeks, makes
a voluntary settlement, by which he withdraws a large portion of
his property from payment of his debts. He then collects the rest
of his assets and spends them recklessly, and as a consequence the
expectant creditor remains unpaid. The settlement is void.
Spirett v. Willoics (1864), 3 De GK J. & S. 293.
2. A. has a life income of about 1,000?. a year, his only other
property being a policy on his life for 1,000?., a copyhold cottage
worth 50?., and some furniture. His creditors are pressing him,
and in order to pay the most urgent he borrows from B. 350?., in
consideration of which he conveys to B. the copyhold cottage and
gives her a bill of sale on his furniture. The arrangement does
not, however, enable him to discharge the whole of his indebtedness,
and being still indebted, he executes a voluntary settlement of his
life policy in favour of C., the result of which is to leave him
insolvent. He then contracts a debt to D. The settlement is void
as against D. Freeman v. Pope (1870), L. E. 5 Ch. App. 538.
3. A. is married on May 31, 1881. In August, 1881, an
action for breach of promise is commenced against him, and the
writ is served on October 8, 1881. About the same time A. learns
that he has become entitled to a legacy under his stepfather's will,
and on the 17th October, 1881, he executes a voluntary settlement
of the legacy on his wife for life, with remainders over. A. is not
influenced in doing this by the action, which he then thinks will
come to nothing. On July 20, 1882, judgment is given against
him in the action for 500?., and he becomes bankrupt. The settle-