Advanced Equity and Trusts Law - alastairhudson.com

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Eastern Distributors Ltd v. Goldring (1957) 3) Certainty of subject matter in commercial law Reading: Hudson, section 3.4.3 “the approach in commercial law”, and 21.5 Sale of Goods (Amendment) Act 1995 (C) Taking security in loan contracts 1) Retention of title Reading: Hudson, para 22.2.1 Aluminium Industrie Vassen v. Romalpa Aluminium [1976] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 443, [1976] 1 WLR 676 2) Floating charges Reading: Hudson, section 23.1 Re Yorkshire Woolcombers Association Ltd [1903] 2 Ch 284, 295, per Romer LJ Illingworth v Houldsworth [1904] AC 355, 358, per Lord Macnaghten Clough Mill v. Martin [1984] 3 All ER 982; [1985] 1 WLR 111 3) Quistclose trusts See next heading 4) Guarantee 5) Purely personal rights 6) Letter of comfort (D) Quistclose trusts Reading: Hudson, section 11.3, and chapter 22 generally. 1. The core principle … a resulting trust or a form of express trust? … Hassall v. Smither (1806) 12 Ves. 119. Re Rogers (1891) 8 Morr 243, 248, per Lindley LJ (must be a resulting trust to prevent trustee from taking benefit from property) Barclays Bank v. Quistclose [1970] AC 567; [1968] 3 All ER 651; [1968] 3 WLR 1097 Re EVTR Ltd. [1987] B.C.L.C. 647. Twinsectra Ltd v. Yardley [1999] Lloyd’s Rep. Bank 438, Court of Appeal. 2. … or a constructive trust? … Carreras Rothmans v. Freeman Mathews Treasure Ltd [1985] 1 Ch 207 cf. Westdeutsche Landesbank [1996] 1 AC 669 3. … or retention of title by lender. Worthington, Proprietary Interests in Commercial Transactions, 43-71 *Twinsectra Ltd v. Yardley [2002] 2 All E.R. 377, at 398, House of Lords, per Lord Millett: ‘… the Quistclose trust is a simple, commercial arrangement akin … to a retention of title clause (though with a different object) which enables the borrower to have recourse to the lender’s money for a particular purpose without entrenching on the lender’s property rights more than necessary to enable the purpose to be achieved. The money remains the property of the lender unless and until it is applied in accordance with his directions, and in so far as it is not so applied it must be returned to him. I am disposed, perhaps predisposed, to think that this is the only analysis which is consistent both with orthodox trust law and with commercial reality.’ Re Margaretta Ltd [2005] All ER (D) 262, per Deputy Judge Crystal QC (following the above) Cf. Chambers, Resulting Trusts, 68-91 www.alastairhudson.com | © professor alastair hudson 42
See also:- (1985) 101 L.Q.R. 269 (P. Millett); (1991) 107 L.Q.R. 608 (C. Rickett); and C. Rickett in Equity, Fiduciaries and Trusts (ed. D. Waters, 1993). Swadling, et al, Quistclose Trusts (Hart, 2004) (E) The nature of the beneficiary’s rights in the trust fund Reading: Hudson, section 4.1 *Saunders v Vautier (1841) 4 Beav 115 Re Bowes [1896] 1 Ch 507 Re Smith [1928] Ch 915 (could compel transfer to beneficiaries even where two classes of beneficiaries under discretionary trusts) In re Holt’s Settlement [1969] 1 Ch 100, 111, per Megarry J: ‘If under a trust every possible beneficiary was under no disability and concurred in the re-arrangement or termination of the trusts, then under the doctrine in Saunders v Vautier those beneficiaries could dispose of the trust property as they thought fit; for in equity the property was theirs. Yet if any beneficiary was an infant, or an unborn or unascertained person, it was held that the court had no general inherent or other jurisdiction to concur in any such arrangement on behalf of that beneficiary.’ (F) The beneficiary principle. Reading: Hudson, section 4.2 1) The traditional beneficiary principle Morice v. Bishop of Durham (1804) 9 Ves. 399; (1805) 10 Ves 522. Bowman v Secular Society Ltd [1917] AC 406 Re Astor’s S.T. [1952] Ch. 534 Leahy v. Att.-Gen. for New South Wales [1959] A.C. 457 Re Grant’s WT [1979] 3 All ER 359 Re Denley’s Trust Deed [1969] l Ch. 373 Re Lipinski’s W.T. [1976] Ch. 235 2) Arguments as to the future of the beneficiary principle in international trusts law Langbein, “The contractarian basis of the law of trusts” (1995) 105 Yale Law Journal 625. J Penner, ‘Exemptions’ in P Birks ed, Breach of Trust (Hart Publishing, 2002) 241. D Hayton, “The irreducible core content of trusteeship” in A Oakley (ed) Trends in Contemporary Trusts Law (OUP, 1996) 47 D Hayton, “Developing the obligation characteristic of the trust” (2001) 117 LQR 96 Hudson, Equity & Trusts, section 21.2 SEMINAR MATERIALS (A) TAKING SECURITY IN LOAN CONTRACTS Introduction General reading Hudson, Equity & Trusts, ch. 22. www.alastairhudson.com | © professor alastair hudson 43
Page 1 and 2: ADVANCED EQUITY AND TRUSTS Universi
Page 3 and 4: Aims and objectives Syllabus This c
Page 5 and 6: TOPIC 1. THE FOUNDATIONS OF EQUITY
Page 7 and 8: Reading: Hudson, section 2.2 The fo
Page 9 and 10: � Equity will not permit statute
Page 11 and 12: (B) Certainty of Subject Matter. Re
Page 13 and 14: equity the property was theirs. Yet
Page 15 and 16: TOPIC 3. FOUNDATIONAL TECHNIQUES OF
Page 17 and 18: Reading: Hudson, section 5.6.1 Cann
Page 19 and 20: 3. Do equitable doctrines protect p
Page 21 and 22: Learoyd v Whiteley (1887) 12 App Ca
Page 23 and 24: (i) The original, negative form of
Page 25 and 26: **O’Rourke v Derbyshire [1920] AC
Page 27 and 28: ecommendation. He signed the papers
Page 29 and 30: *Cowan v. Scargill [1985] 2 Ch. 270
Page 31 and 32: Trustee Act 1925, s.61: “If it ap
Page 33 and 34: Specific reading Hudson, Equity & T
Page 35 and 36: para 47-18) of a specified kind 13
Page 37 and 38: appropriately and to keep records a
Page 39 and 40: � Therefore it may be possible to
Page 41: TOPIC 6. EQUITY AND COMMERCE (1): S
Page 45 and 46: participants goes into bankruptcy.
Page 47 and 48: drafted to make it clear that all c
Page 49 and 50: to consider the importance of Quist
Page 51 and 52: therefore it is said that the oblig
Page 53 and 54: there is some identifiable benefici
Page 55 and 56: (H) THE LIMITATION OF TRUSTEES’ O
Page 57 and 58: these moneys for any other purpose
Page 59 and 60: detail - Quistclose trusts, retenti
Page 61 and 62: Finn, “Fiduciary Law in the Moder
Page 63 and 64: Collective investment schemes are e
Page 65 and 66: 6 REGULATION OF COLLECTIVE INVESTME
Page 67 and 68: The market abuse regime relates to
Page 69 and 70: 1. Evaluate the changes which Lord
Page 71 and 72: 3) The corporate opportunity doctri
Page 73 and 74: Joan asked why only one profit esti
Page 75 and 76: epresentee. It may well be that if
Page 77 and 78: TOPIC 10. BREACH OF TRUST (I): DISH
Page 79 and 80: (4) knowledge of circumstances whic
Page 81 and 82: Sullivan told his assistant, Malone
Page 83 and 84: *Re Oatway [1903] 2 Ch. 356 - benef
Page 85 and 86: d) When must the change of position
Page 87 and 88: Crafty advised Albert to use the ot
Page 89 and 90: Reading: Hudson, para 15.4.1 Gissin
Page 91 and 92: All three of them decided to buy a
Page 93 and 94:
Lim v. Ang [1992] 1 WLR 113 Walton
Page 95 and 96:
TOPIC 14. TRUSTS OF HOMES (III): OT
Page 97 and 98:
childhood friend and solicitor, Fla
Page 99 and 100:
National Westminster Bank v. Kostop
show all

Advanced Equity and Trusts Law - alastairhudson.com

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?