Re Ralli's Will Trusts
Where the trustee of a covenant to settle property comes to hold the property in another capacity, the trust is completely constituted, however he acquired it.
Facts
Helen covenanted in her marriage settlement to transfer to the trustees any property she became entitled to, including her interest under her father's will. The trustee of the marriage settlement, Mr Hoskins, later became the sole trustee of her father's will, and so held the property to which Helen was entitled. After Helen's death, the question arose whether Mr Hoskins held the property on the trusts of the marriage settlement, for the benefit of volunteers.
Legal principle
Buckley J held that Mr Hoskins held the property on the trusts of the marriage settlement. Since the property had come into the hands of the trustee of the settlement, it did not matter how he had acquired it, and the trust was completely constituted. The beneficiaries did not need to enforce the covenant, which as volunteers they could not have done. The trustee could not hold the property on trust for Helen's estate, because Helen had agreed to transfer it to the settlement trustees.
Related cases on formalities and constitution of trusts
- Re Brooks' Settlement Trusts [1939] Ch 993
- Cannon v Hartley [1949] Ch 213
- Choithram (T) International SA v Pagarani [2001] 1 WLR 1
- Fletcher v Fletcher (1844) 4 Hare 67
- Grey v IRC [1960] AC 1
- Hodgson v Marks [1971] Ch 892
- King v Dubrey [2015] EWCA Civ 581, [2016] Ch 221
- Mascall v Mascall (1984) 50 P & CR 119
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.
