Bennet v Bennet
The presumption of advancement applied between a father and child, but not between a mother and child.
Facts
A mother paid money to her son, who later died. The question was whether the son's estate held the money on resulting trust for the mother, or whether the presumption of advancement applied, so that the money was treated as a gift.
Legal principle
Jessel MR held that the presumption of advancement did not apply between a mother and her child, so the money was held on resulting trust for the mother. He said that the presumption of advancement arose where the person making the payment was the father, or a person in loco parentis, because of the father's moral obligation to provide for his child. A mother had no such obligation in law. The presumption of advancement is to be abolished by section 199 of the Equality Act 2010, which has not yet been brought into force.
Related cases on resulting trusts
- Re Abbott Fund Trusts [1900] 2 Ch 326
- Air Jamaica Ltd v Charlton [1999] 1 WLR 1399
- Barclays Bank Ltd v Quistclose Investments Ltd [1970] AC 567
- Dyer v Dyer (1788) 2 Cox Eq 92
- Fowkes v Pascoe (1875) LR 10 Ch App 343
- Re Gillingham Bus Disaster Fund [1958] Ch 300
- Hussey v Palmer [1972] 1 WLR 1286
- Laskar v Laskar [2008] EWCA Civ 347, [2008] 1 WLR 2695
Studying equity and trusts? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
