Knowledge

Tribe v Tribe

Source đź“ť

92:
A father transferred company shares to his son (presumption of advancement) to preserve them for the family’s benefit because he could be soon liable for dilapidations under commercial leases. It turned out he was not liable. The son refused to re-transfer shares.
109:
said it was true that an illegal purpose cannot rebut the presumption of advancement, but because the illegal purpose had not been carried out, the father was not precluded of pleading the purpose to claim a
240: 345: 143: 270: 210: 350: 226: 105:
held that the father could demand return of the shares, because his illegal scheme had not in fact been carried into effect.
136: 102: 340: 300: 129: 106: 256: 77: 81: 286: 159: 8: 311: 200: 182: 69: 40: 230: 65: 290: 260: 246: 73: 276: 216: 186: 170: 111: 334: 121: 242:
Westdeutsche Landesbank Girozentrale v Islington LBC
16:
English trusts law case, concerning resulting trusts
332: 137: 151: 144: 130: 346:Court of Appeal (England and Wales) cases 272:Barclays Bank Ltd v Quistclose Invest Ltd 212:Vandervell v Inland Revenue Commissioners 333: 125: 227:Re Vandervell’s Trustees Ltd (No 2) 13: 14: 362: 351:1995 in United Kingdom case law 301:Resulting trusts in English law 53:Illegality, presumption, shares 1: 322: 7: 117: 96: 10: 367: 257:Air Jamaica Ltd v Charlton 78:presumption of advancement 297: 283: 267: 253: 237: 223: 207: 193: 179: 167: 157: 52: 47: 36: 28: 23: 317: 287:Twinsectra Ltd v Yardley 160:Law of Property Act 1925 87: 341:English trusts case law 174:(1875) LR 10 Ch App 343 152:Resulting trusts cases 66:[1995] EWCA 20 162:ss 53(1)(c) and 60(3) 312:English trusts law 183:Tinsley v Milligan 70:English trusts law 307: 306: 72:case, concerning 57: 56: 358: 273: 243: 213: 146: 139: 132: 123: 122: 74:resulting trusts 21: 20: 366: 365: 361: 360: 359: 357: 356: 355: 331: 330: 325: 320: 308: 303: 293: 279: 271: 263: 249: 241: 233: 219: 211: 203: 189: 175: 171:Fowkes v Pascoe 163: 153: 150: 120: 112:resulting trust 103:Court of Appeal 99: 90: 32:Court of Appeal 17: 12: 11: 5: 364: 354: 353: 348: 343: 329: 328: 324: 321: 319: 316: 315: 314: 305: 304: 298: 295: 294: 284: 281: 280: 268: 265: 264: 254: 251: 250: 238: 235: 234: 224: 221: 220: 208: 205: 204: 194: 191: 190: 180: 177: 176: 168: 165: 164: 158: 155: 154: 149: 148: 141: 134: 126: 119: 116: 98: 95: 89: 86: 55: 54: 50: 49: 45: 44: 38: 34: 33: 30: 26: 25: 15: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 363: 352: 349: 347: 344: 342: 339: 338: 336: 327: 326: 313: 310: 309: 302: 296: 292: 289: 288: 282: 278: 275: 274: 266: 262: 259: 258: 252: 248: 245: 244: 236: 232: 229: 228: 222: 218: 215: 214: 206: 202: 199: 198: 197:Tribe v Tribe 192: 188: 185: 184: 178: 173: 172: 166: 161: 156: 147: 142: 140: 135: 133: 128: 127: 124: 115: 113: 108: 104: 94: 85: 83: 79: 75: 71: 67: 63: 62: 61:Tribe v Tribe 51: 46: 42: 39: 35: 31: 27: 24:Tribe v Tribe 22: 19: 285: 269: 255: 239: 225: 209: 196: 195: 181: 169: 100: 91: 60: 59: 58: 18: 201:EWCA Civ 20 41:EWCA Civ 20 335:Categories 323:References 231:EWCA Civ 7 107:Millett LJ 82:illegality 43:, Ch 107 37:Citations 118:See also 97:Judgment 48:Keywords 291:UKHL 12 261:UKHL 20 247:UKHL 12 277:UKHL 4 217:UKHL 3 187:UKHL 3 76:, the 68:is an 318:Notes 88:Facts 64: 29:Court 299:see 101:The 80:and 337:: 114:. 84:. 145:e 138:t 131:v

Index

EWCA Civ 20
[1995] EWCA 20
English trusts law
resulting trusts
presumption of advancement
illegality
Court of Appeal
Millett LJ
resulting trust
v
t
e
Law of Property Act 1925
Fowkes v Pascoe
Tinsley v Milligan
UKHL 3
Tribe v Tribe
EWCA Civ 20
Vandervell v Inland Revenue Commissioners
UKHL 3
Re Vandervell’s Trustees Ltd (No 2)
EWCA Civ 7
Westdeutsche Landesbank Girozentrale v Islington LBC
UKHL 12
Air Jamaica Ltd v Charlton
UKHL 20
Barclays Bank Ltd v Quistclose Invest Ltd
UKHL 4
Twinsectra Ltd v Yardley
UKHL 12

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

↑