Scribd
Upload
367 views5 pages

CERTAINTIES (Solved Questions)

The document discusses the validity of various provisions in the wills of Chi, Harry, Nia, and Thomas, focusing on the certainties required for valid express trusts. It analyzes each provision based on certainty of intention, subject matter, and objects, highlighting potential issues such as the destruction of records and ambiguous language. The document concludes with an assessment of whether each provision meets the legal requirements for enforceability.

Uploaded by

khanjawadzafar22
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
367 views5 pages

CERTAINTIES (Solved Questions)

The document discusses the validity of various provisions in the wills of Chi, Harry, Nia, and Thomas, focusing on the certainties required for valid express trusts. It analyzes each provision based on certainty of intention, subject matter, and objects, highlighting potential issues such as the destruction of records and ambiguous language. The document concludes with an assessment of whether each provision meets the legal requirements for enforceability.

Uploaded by

khanjawadzafar22
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 5

DENNING LAW SCHOOL

TRUST LAW

CERTAINTIES PAST PAPERS:


2024 B
To what extent are the following provisions, found in the will of Chi, who died earlier
this year, valid?
(a) all of my collection of bottles of whisky to Alfonso. (Chi stored his whisky in a
specialist warehouse along with the bottles of other collectors. The company which
owns the warehouse has just gone bankrupt and their liquidator is proposing to
sell all the bottles in the warehouse to pay off the company’s debts);
(b) one of my antique cars to my daughter, Xe, as she has always loved them. The
other four to be sold and the monies paid to my residuary legatees;
(c) £100,000 to my Trustees to distribute as they see fit in their absolute discretion
among my co-workers. (Chi worked at a large university in the Engineering
Department);
(d) my residuary estate to my trustees to distribute in such amounts as they shall
determine among the members of the UK Whisky Appreciation Society, in the hope
that they shall use it for good causes. (At the time of Chi’s death, the Association
had 10,000 members).
2024 A
Harry died earlier this year. His will contains the following provisions and his
Executors and Trustees come to you for advice about their validity:
(a) all my residuary estate on trust for the students of Chelsea University, in such
shares as my Trustees shall in their absolute discretion determine, failing which to
the Chelsea Hospital. (Harry attended Chelsea University when it first opened in
1980, since when it has grown to be the largest university in London);
(b) £50,000 to my children, in equal shares, provided that none shall have attended
Leeds University;
(c) £400,000 to my Trustees for the purpose of paying an amount in such
proportions as they shall determine to such of the staff at Chelsea University who
have excelled in teaching in the past year;
(d) £1million to Chelsea University to do with as the Vice-Chancellor shall
determine.
2023 A
DENNING LAW SCHOOL
TRUST LAW

Q1: Discuss the validity of the following dispositions in the Will of Nia, who
died last month:
(a) £10,000 to my trustees to distribute equally among the people who studied
law with me at university. Nia was one of 50 people who studied law at Crowcroft
University and who graduated together;
(b) £20,000 to my trustees believing they will look after my close friend, Ena;
(c) £40,000 to my trustees to distribute as they see fit among the candidates of
Crowcroft University; and
(d) £80,000 to my trustees to distribute as my close friend Ena shall choose from
among the law lecturers of Crowcroft University within two years of my death,
failing which the balance shall be distributed to all lecturers of Crowcroft University
equally.
The trustees wish to carry out all of these instructions. Unfortunately, the records
of past candidates of Crowcroft University have been destroyed in a fire. There are
currently 5,000 candidates studying there. Ena has asked the trustees to pay all of
the £80,000 to Dr Max, her brother.

A. Summary of Facts + Issues + General Assumptions


In the given facts, we are required to discuss the validity of the four
provisions in Nia’s will. Assuming that Nia’s will complies with the formalities
of s.9 of the Wills Act 1837, the pertinent issues in this factual situation relate
to the three certainties required for a valid express trust, namely certainty of
intention, subject matter and objects (Knight v. Knight). We shall now
discuss each of the provision separately and determine its validity.

Part A

B. Certainty of Intention – Law


C. Certainty of Intention – Application
(in the present case, the words used are “to distribute”, which are obligatory
in nature and hence indicate clear and certain intention of Nia to impose
trust obligation on the trustees.

D. Certainty of Subject Matter – Law


E. Certainty of Subject Matter – Application
DENNING LAW SCHOOL
TRUST LAW

(In the present case, the subject matter is GBP 10,000/-, which is
conceptually certain and hence would meet the certainty of subject matter
requirement)

F. Certainty of Objects
a. Identify the type of trust (Fixed Trust)
b. Test (Complete list test, as given in the IRC v. Broadway Cottages)
c. Objects: people who studied law with me at university
d. Test met or fail: CL is not possible, b/c the record was destroyed in
fire. Trust will fail

Part B (b) £20,000 to my trustees believing they will look after my close
friend, Ena;
Certainty of Intention – Application (Words over here are not obligatory,
“believing they will look after” – therefore intention not present)

Certainty of SM – for sake of argument, if intention present, then SM is also


present

Certainty of Objects – for sake of argument, if intention present, then


objects (ena) is also present

Part C £40,000 to my trustees to distribute as they see fit among the


candidates of Crowcroft University

Intention – Present (to distribute)


SM – Present (GBP 40,000/-)
Objects
a. Type of Trust: Discretionary (as they deem fit)
b. Test: is or is not (McPhail v. Doulton)
c. Objects (candidates of Crowcroft University)
d. Test met or fail: Test met

Part D: £80,000 to my trustees to distribute as my close friend Ena shall choose


from among the law lecturers of Crowcroft University within two years of my death,
failing which the balance shall be distributed to all lecturers of Crowcroft University
equally.
DENNING LAW SCHOOL
TRUST LAW

Intention – Met
Subject Matter: met
Objects:
a. Type of Trust: Power of appointment
b. Test: is or is not test (Re Gulbenkian)
c. Objects: lecturers of Crowcroft University
d. Test met or fail: Met – Dr Max

2022 A
Consider the validity of the following provisions contained in the Will of Thomas,
who died in March 2022:
(a) £100,000 to my trustees to build and maintain a pavilion on the Village Green
in Oldhampton, the village where I lived, for so long as the law allows;
(b) £50,000 to my trustees to be distributed equally among the children of my
colleagues who worked with me at St Jude’s College. St Jude’s College has since
closed down, but Thomas worked there from 2010 – 2020;
- Certainty of Intention – Law (short)
- Certainty of Intention – application
- Certainty of Subject Matter – Law (short)
- Certainty of Subject Matter – application
- Certainty of Objects:
a. Type of Trust: Fixed
b. Test: Complete List (IRC v. Broadway Cottages)
c. Objects: children of my colleagues who worked with me at St Jude’s
College
d. Test met or fail: If list can be made of the children – then valid.
Otherwise, invalid
(c) £200,000 to my trustees to be distributed in such shares as they see fit among
those people who were students of St Jude’s College from 2010 – 2020;
- Certainty of Intention – Law (short)
- Certainty of Intention – application
DENNING LAW SCHOOL
TRUST LAW

- Certainty of Subject Matter – Law (short)


- Certainty of Subject Matter – application
- Certainty of Objects:
a. Type of Trust: Discretionary (as they see fit)
b. Test: is or is not (McPhail v. Doulton)
c. Objects: students of St Jude’s College from 2010 – 2020
d. Test met or fail: Met (St. Jude’s College students are identifiable)

(d) £75,000 to my trustees for distribution among the inhabitants of Oldhampton


within two years of my death, in such shares as my wife, Wendy shall decide, failing
which any unspent money shall go absolutely to my own children in equal shares.
Thomas has three children and Wendy tells the trustees that she wishes to
distribute the money rather than give it to her children if at all possible;
Objects:
- Type of Trust: POA
- Test: Re Gulbenkian
- Objects: inhabitants of Oldhampton
- Test met or not: Met
(e) £25,000 to my trustees to spend on any project that promotes peace and
goodwill in the village of Oldhampton.

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy