📚

Understanding Resulting Trusts in English Law

May 2, 2025

Resulting Trusts in English Law

Introduction to Resulting Trusts

  • The term "resulting" comes from Latin "result RA", meaning to "jump back".
  • Involves property transferred to another but "jumps back" to the original owner.

Examples and Categories of Resulting Trusts

Example by Lord Brown Wilkinson

  • Case: Westdeutsche Landesbank v Islington LBC (1996)
  • Scenario 1: Unknown beneficiaries in a trust lead to property "resulting" back to the settlor.
  • Scenario 2: Contributors to purchase price of property are entitled to an equitable interest proportionate to their contribution.

Categories

  • Automatic Resulting Trusts: Occur when there is a failure in identifying owners of equitable interests.
  • Presumed Resulting Trusts: Property is presumed to pass as a gift in specific relationships, e.g., father-child, husband-wife.

Automatic Resulting Trusts

  • Failures can occur due to certainty of objects or unmet conditions (precedent/subsequent).
  • Surplus Property: Generally results back to settlor; exceptions include charitable trusts (cy-près doctrine), beneficiaries winding up the trust (Saunders v Vautier), and distribution among members (Re Bucks).

Quistclose Trusts

  • Case: Quistclose Investments Ltd case (1970)
  • Loan with specific purpose creates a resulting trust when purpose is not fulfilled, preventing creditors from accessing funds.

Presumed Resulting Trusts

  • Based on relationships: father-child (Bennet v Bennet), husband-wife (Tinker v Tinker).
  • Implications for joint accounts and voluntary gifts (Re Vinogradoff).
  • Land: Generally requires written contracts but aware of resulting trust possibilities.

Legal Presumptions and Rebuttals

  • Presumption can be challenged, e.g., misconduct with joint accounts.
  • In family transfer cases, a resulting trust may be created to prevent tax evasion (Sekhon v Alissa).

Resulting Trusts and Illegality

  • Historical Approach: Illegality prevents resulting trusts (Gascoigne v Gascoigne).
  • Modern Approach: Depends on public interest (Patel v Mirza, Tribe v Tribe).
  • Insolvency Act 1986 (Section 423): Courts can reallocate property to prevent creditor evasion.

Mistake in Resulting Trusts

  • No resulting trust if the transfer was intended.
  • Exception: If the recipient knows the transfer was a mistake, a resulting trust can be created.

Exam and Essay Considerations

  • Problem Question: Distinguish between automatic and presumed resulting trusts.
  • Essay Question: Consider issues like categorization, sexism in presumed trusts, and implications of illegality (e.g., Patel v Mirza).

Conclusion

  • Understanding and application of resulting trusts are complex, involving legal principles and case law.