You must have Credits on your Balance to download this sample
Pages 4 (1004 words)
It is assumed that the will, by which the 950 shares have been bequeathed to the Accountant, Tom, to be held in trust for Ben's nephew, Andrew, is a written one, since, f Section 53 (1) (c) of the Law of Property Act 1925 categorically states that any verbal or non-written disposition of Equitable interest is void and unenforceable…
In the Vandervill v. IRC (1967) 2 WLR 87 case, the main issue that arouse was the question of the demarcation of legal and equitable interests. The Provisions of Section 53 (1) (c) is possible only when the legal rights and the equitable interests have been suitably demarcated at the time of passing of the interest. However, the Courts held that since, Vandervill had bypassed this requirement, by first transferring the shares to himself and then to the ultimate beneficiaries, and thus, the requirement for invocation of this section does not arise. (The Statutory requirement for the creation of the Trust. 2001).
Although the law is dealing with the Property Act it also extends to other aspects of equitable interest. Under the Section 5 (1) of the Wills Act, 1988, " it is seen that every person may dispose by will, executed in accordance with this Act, of all real estate and all personal estate owned by him at the time of his death" (Wills Act 1988. 2005).
In this case it is seen that a trust has been created in favour of Ben and he has nominated Richard to hold the 2000 shares in trust on his behalf. Through his written will, he has directed that 950 of the above shares may be bequeathed to his Accountant, Tom, to be held on behalf of his nephew, Andrew, the legal beneficiary of the gifted shares.
In the decided case of Goldcorpe RE 1995, 1 AC 74, claims ...
Not exactly what you need?