The deceased had withdrawn a capital sum from her bank, and given it to her grandchildren before claiming income support. She had not declared the sums given away. The judge (Harry Walker) had held that there had been no gift, and that a resulting trust had arisen: ‘if there has been a contract or a trust with an illegal object or an illegal purpose then if the plaintiff can assert his rights under the contract or the trust without relying upon the illegality itself, he is entitled to succeed against the defendant.’ The defendants appealed an order for enforcement of the trust.
Held: ‘It would be absurd as well as unjust if a claimant, claiming a resulting trust, could not lead evidence of fraud in order to disprove a spurious defence.’ The appellants had not been able to establish a reason for the gift withourt relying upon the fraud. The appeal failed.
Citations:
[1997] EWCA Civ 1401, (1997) 74 P and CR 453
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Applied – Tinsley v Milligan CA 1992
The court considered the defence of illegal user to a claim to have established an easement by prescription: ‘These authorities seem to me to establish that when applying the ‘ex turpi causa’ maxim in a case in which a defence of illegality has been . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Trusts
Updated: 06 November 2022; Ref: scu.141797